The Middle East part 2

[theavonlady 2]

Ah poor avon once again on her mission to prove that Islam is a barbaric religion and against jews bla blah ...

Seriously avon are you a islamic scholar or something?

Me? An Islamic scholar? No. Am I supposed to be one in order to read a news item on Yahoo?

Anyway, these guys claim to be Islamic scholars, in your home country, no less.

Let's read some of their - what you like to call - "blah blah":

"Two groups – the Jews and the Christians – are the main elements constituting the Camp of Kufr [unbelief] and will continue to be its two foundations until Allah allows their downfall and annihilation at the end of days...

When the Prophet Muhammad was sent out, the Camp of Kufr declared war on his message. At the center of this war were these groups, particularly the Jews. These two groups will continue to serve as the grindstones of the conflict and the war between belief and Kufr until eternity comes… The conflict will end when Jesus the son of Mary, peace be upon him, arrives to break the cross, and wipes it off the face of the earth, and kills the blind [false] Messiah, the leader of the Jews and the tyrant whom they await. Until that day, the conflict between us, the Muslims, and the Jews and Christians will continue, and it will ebb and flow, one day ours, another day theirs…

"The Jews are the objects of Allah's [promised] wrath, while the Christians deviate from the path of righteousness… The Qur'an described the Jews as a nation cursed by Allah, a nation at which he was angry – some of whom he turned into apes and pigs…"

- Sheikh Abd Al-'Aziz Qari, Preacher, Ka'ba Mosque, Al-Madina, Saudi Arabia

"There can be neither an agreement nor a meeting point between the people of Islam and the Jewish and Christian People of the Book… How can we permit the Catholic Pope's talk of a need to find meeting points and agreement between Islam and Christianity, so that there will be peaceful coexistence between the two religions and harmony between the two communities? Is it conceivable that there should be agreement and a meeting point with those who fabricate terrible falsehoods about Allah … claiming that Jesus, peace be upon him, is his son?!…"

- Sheikh Adnan Ahmad Siyami, Preacher, Mecca mosque, Saudi Arabia

"The Jews and Christians are infidels, enemies of Allah, his Messenger, and the believers. They deny and curse Allah and his Messenger… How can we draw near to these infidels …? They deny even the messengers sent to them. They do not believe in Moses, they do not believe in Jesus – because if they really believed in them, they would join Islam, because every prophet heralded to his nation the coming of the Prophet Muhammad and the need to believe in him…

"Some may say: 'How can the inventor of electricity be placed in Hell – he illuminated the world for us.' Others may say, 'How can we be hostile to the Jews and Christians when they invented and manufactured even the items we use in our mosques?' Still others may say, 'The messenger of Allah left his shield with a Jew and went to visit his sick Jewish neighbor. Why do you preach to us to do differently?' The truth is that this is an inversion of the facts, and deception. The Jew whom the Prophet considered a citizen had accepted the agreement [that the Prophet Muhammad had concluded with the Jews of Al-Madina] … and when his people violated that pact, and supported the polytheists instead of the Muslims, their punishment was death, captivity, and the expropriation of their assets.

"If the infidels live among the Muslims, in accordance with the conditions set out by the Prophet – there is nothing wrong with it provided they pay Jizya [9] to the Islamic treasury. Other conditions are … that they do not renovate a church or a monastery [and] do not rebuild ones that were destroyed, that they feed for three days any Muslim who passes by their homes … that they rise when a Muslim wishes to sit, that they do not imitate Muslims in dress and speech, nor ride horses, nor own swords, nor arm themselves with any kind of weapon; that they do not sell wine, do not show the cross, do not ring church bells, do not raise their voices during prayer, that they shave their hair in front so as to make them easily identifiable, do not incite anyone against the Muslims, and do not strike a Muslim… If they violate these conditions, they have no protection."

- Sheikh Marzouq Salem Al-Ghamdi, preacher, Al-Rahmah mosque, Mecca, Saudi Arabia

And here's a local yokel:

"Have no mercy on the Jews, no matter where they are, in any country. Fight them, wherever you are. Wherever you meet them, kill them. Wherever you are, kill those Jews and those Americans who are like them – and those who stand by them – they are all in one trench, against the Arabs and the Muslims – because they established Israel here, in the beating heart of the Arab world, in Palestine. They created it to be the outpost of their civilization – and the vanguard of their army, and to be the sword of the West and of the Crusaders, hanging over the necks of the monotheists, the Muslims in these lands. They wanted the Jews to be their spearhead… Allah, deal with the Jews, your enemies and the enemies of Islam. Deal with the crusaders, and America, and Europe behind them, O Lord of the worlds…"

- Sheikh Ahmad Abu Halabiya, member of the PA-appointed Fatwa Council and former acting rector of the Islamic University in Gaza, in a sermon from the Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Aal Nahyan mosque, Gaza, Palestinian Authority, broadcast on Palestinian Television, October 13, 2001

These are but of few of the myriad of verbatim quotations of theological sermons that are pronounced in mosques in Saudi Arabia, the Palestinian Authority, Europe, the United States - you name it.

Now I'm sure that I, being an ignorant Jewish infidel, have completely misunderstood the words and intentions of the above speakers. Please correct my misunderstandings.

For those of you who are interested in further disputing the above texts, you'll find those quotes and more in Contemporary Islamist Ideology Permitting Genocidal Murder, a paper just presented to the 2004 Stockholm International Forum on Preventing Genocide.

Quote[/b] ]Since you were adept enough to ASSUME something out of the paragraphs context without ANY solid evidence backing your stupid assumptions  

All I did was quote verbatim the relevant text of the AP new article.

Unlike you, I will repeat those parts of the article you chose to leave out, as did Bernadotte (coincidence?):

Quote[/b] ]In speaking of terrorists who killed fellow Muslims, al-Sheik was clearly referring to the Prophet Muhammad's final sermon, delivered on Mount Arafat 14 centuries ago.

It contained the line: "Know that every Muslim is a Muslim's brother, and the Muslims are brethren. Fighting between them should be avoided."

Now you go on to say:

Quote[/b] ]I dont usually bother correcting you

Maybe because you can't.

Quote[/b] ]but this is too much this time.

This is what was said:

"Is it holy war to shed Muslim blood? Is it holy war to shed the blood of non-Muslims given sanctuary in Muslim lands? Is it holy war to destroy the possessions of Muslims?" he <Sheik Abdul Aziz al-Sheik, telling 2 million pilgrims in Mecca>

DID it say anywhere that killing nonmuslims is not terrorism?

Once again, the sermon is about Moslems killing Moslems. Please quote me from a single sermon at the Hadj where someone preached the words "blwoing up buses, restaurants, planes, skyscrapers full of people is terrorism and a disgrace to Allah's name and divine message to the people of the world" or even slightly similar.

Go on. Give me a quote.

Quote[/b] ]You are VERY good at manipulaing sentences and using them for your own VILE purposes.

All verbatim quotes, just like the ones from your native country.

Quote[/b] ]ISLAM doesnt allow you to spill the blood of a NON MUSLIM nomatter WHEREEVER he is or who he works under or over. Until unless your attacked by him or hes a threat to your existence you WILL NOT ATTACK anyone be he a MUSLIM or a NON-MUSLIM until unless your in the battlefield/in a war.

Please explain the contradiction between what you're claiming and what Islamic clergymen are preaching to the masses.

Quote[/b] ]Its a pity not many muslims are on this forum to correct your baseless anti-islamic propaganda machine from where you spew out these crappy assumptions 24/7.

Better than the supression of the truth you spew out 9/11.

qUILL is also a Moslem. Let's ask him. qUILL?

Quote[/b] ]Bernadotte is right these sort of comments from you truly reflect your mentality.

Like you, Bernadotte has mostly not responded to the points I've brought up in the last few pages.

Go ahead. Make my day.

edit: note that all of the URLs for the quotes taken from the Alminbar.cc site are out of date, as the site has been completely redesigned, invalidating all prior URLs.

[Bernadotte 0]

I never said you didn't "respond". I said that when you posted this, you conveniently left out the text from the same article you yourself linked to, that explains and, IMO - not yours, justified Israel's actions.

Then I believe you misunderstood what rufusmac and I were discussing.

He suggested that Palestinian refugees should not get their original homes back because thay would uproot Israelis living there now who had nothing to do with the original refugee problem.  No doubt some did but I'll agree that most didn't.

I presented the home demolition problem as an example of Palestinians currently being uprooted who had nothing to do with Israel's problem.  Although, no doubt some did but most didn't.

In any case, the debate that you stepped into was between rufusmac and I.  If uprooting an Israeli is not justified by the fact that a Palestinian owns his house then why should an IDF soldier's well being justify uprooting a Palestinian?  Especially when there are many other better ways of protecting the soldier.

[Bernadotte 0]

LOL @ the double standard  

Like you, Bernadotte has mostly not responded to the points I've brought up in the last few pages.

I can choose to reply to what I want to and what I don't. Find yourself another forum slave.

But I wasn't aware that I'd missed something.  These things happen.  

If you'd be kind enough to draw them to my attention I'll either respond or show you where I've already responded. TIA.

[theavonlady 2]

If uprooting an Israeli is not justified by the fact that a Palestinian owns his house then why should an IDF soldier's well being justify uprooting a Palestinian?

MYTH: Israel refused to allow Palestinians to return to their homes so Jews could steal their property.

Quote[/b] ]Especially when there are many other better ways of protecting the soldier.

Ah! The big military genious. Go on... tell us.

I'm sure you're familair with the details of the terrain in Rafiah and the terrorist activities and mass cross-border weapons smuggling activities that are going on there.

So, what is your "better way"?

[theavonlady 2]

LOL @ the double standard  

Like you, Bernadotte has mostly not responded to the points I've brought up in the last few pages.

I can choose to reply to what I want to and what I don't. Find yourself another forum slave.

There's one small difference.

My posts here are replies to topics and issues started by others.

You'll find that it's very rare that I post on this thread something completely different that has nothing to do with the topic being discussed.

edit: specifically, you wanted my opinion on the Benny Morris article(s). I did not bring up the subject and I have not yet read the articles and I don't feel that when you say "jump", I have to jump.

edit: Out of the office I go. Post away!

[Bernadotte 0]

Less civilised response:

I can choose to reply to what I want to and what I don't. Find yourself another forum slave.

More civilised response:

...you wanted my opinion on the Benny Morris article(s). I did not bring up the subject and I have not yet read the articles and I don't feel that when you say "jump", I have to jump.

I do detect progress.  

[Bernadotte 0]

If uprooting an Israeli is not justified by the fact that a Palestinian owns his house then why should an IDF soldier's well being justify uprooting a Palestinian?

MYTH: Israel refused to allow Palestinians to return to their homes so Jews could steal their property.

LOL... This link merely confirms that Palestinians remain separated from their homes.

Quote[/b] ]Especially when there are many other better ways of protecting the soldier.

Ah! The big military genious. Go on... tell us.

Already did.  Please have another look to where it was being discussed.

[theavonlady 2]

LOL... This link merely confirms that Palestinians remain separated from their homes.

LOL... So?

There's enough explanation there and on the following article (MYTH: UN resolutions call for Israel to repatriate all Palestinian refugees - just half a centimer down the same page) as to why the situation remained that way.

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]Especially when there are many other better ways of protecting the soldier.

Ah! The big military genious. Go on... tell us.

Already did.  Please have another look to where it was being discussed.

Found it:

Quote[/b] ]If the IDF really wanted to protect soldiers patrolling the border they would construct a few kilometers of wall. Of course, such a wall would actually have to follow a recognised border so naturally there's not much Israeli enthusiasm for that.

How does this prevent smuggling via weapons tunnels?

Why do you accuse Israel of no enthusiasm for "recognized borders" when it's the Palestinians who are violating the agreed upon Rafiah border (time to pull out your Oslo Accords map, sonny) which is supposed to be under Israeli control - meaning that Palestinian terrorist bullets and RPGs are not supposed to fly through its airspace nor are Palestinian weapons smuggling tunnels permitted to be dug under those same agreed upon borders, nor are Palestinian terrorists supposed to enter that area to plant roadside charges.

Details. Details.

[Bernadotte 0]

There's enough explanation there and on the following article (MYTH: UN resolutions call for Israel to repatriate all Palestinian refugees - just half a centimer down the same page) as to why the situation remained that way.

Explanations for keeping people from their property is one thing.  Justification is another.

Political decisions made by foreign powers (i.e. Arab states, Arab League, etc.) does not justify keeping people from their property.  That's no different than holding those property owners hostage in refugee camps until the foreign powers pay a ransom.  And it should be no surprise to you that those foreign powers chose not to negotiate with hostage takers.

[Pipski 0]

Sometimes I wonder if things would have been different if the Internet had existed during the rise of Hitler and Nazi Germany.  Certainly the web would have been used to spread a lot of propaganda, just like today, but it also would have helped to cut through a lot of it.

Back in the 1930s there probably would have been 3 types of participants:

- People who spread a one-sided view (on either side);

- People who try to sort it out and understand what it really happening; and

- People who think that we'll all just get along better if we shut down the debate.

I'll try a different anology.

This is not a simple math problem.  It's more like trying to predict the weather with vastly different methods.

- The scientists say it will rain Monday based on millions of variables and measurements;

- The historians say it will rain Tuesday because it rained on that same day in 1939; and

- The theologians say it will rain Wednesday because God promised it would rain on that day.

My advice to anyone who would prefer not to be a weatherman is to sit back and try to enjoy the debate because one thing is quite certain.  Whenever it actually does start to rain, it will also rain on you.

If more than one post in four debated actual events, yeah. To extend your meteorological analogy, the weathermen have got drunk and started hitting each other with cricket bats.

[theavonlady 2]

Political decisions made by foreign powers (i.e. Arab states, Arab League, etc.) does not justify keeping people from their property.

It does when those same nations and people are a hostile danger to your own country.

Quote[/b] ]That's no different than holding those property owners hostage in refugee camps

Israel didn't put anyone in Refugee camps. The Arabs did and keep them there to this very day.

Quote[/b] ]until the foreign powers pay a ransom.

The same "foreign powers" that declared a hostile war in the first place, with a declared intent of killing the Jewish inhabitants of Israel.

Victors in a defensive war dictating terms to the losing aggressor. You wish to call it "ransom"? Fine. Call it what you want.

Quote[/b] ]And it should be no surprise to you that those foreign powers chose not to negotiate with hostage takers.

Same nonsense repeated again.

[Bernadotte 0]

How does this prevent smuggling via weapons tunnels?

Please read the article again.  The 30 dwellings and mosque in question were destroyed by the IDF because of reported sniping, not tunnels.

Why do you accuse Israel of no enthusiasm for "recognized borders"...

I didn't.  Please read it again.

[Bernadotte 0]

Political decisions made by foreign powers (i.e. Arab states, Arab League, etc.) does not justify keeping people from their property.

It does when those same nations and people are a hostile danger to your own country.

Please show me where Israel argued for keeping owners from their property on the basis of their "hostility" and that the UN accepted that argument.  Did Israel conduct interviews with each home owner to determine their level of hostility?  

Israel's argument against the property owners returning was on the basis of the foreign powers' hostilities.  The home owners were just hostages.

Israel didn't put anyone in Refugee camps. The Arabs did and keep them there to this very day.

Of course they didn't.  The Serbs didn't put the Kosovars into refugee camps either.  It's not very common that refugees are hosted within the same country they fled from.  I'm surprised that this isn't more obvious to you.

Victors in a defensive war dictating terms to the losing aggressor. You wish to call it "ransom"? Fine. Call it what you want.

Israel can dictate what ever terms it wants to the failed aggressors, but those terms should not dispossess  a civilian population that merely got caught in the middle.

[theavonlady 2]

How does this prevent smuggling via weapons tunnels?

Please read the article again.  The 30 dwellings and mosque in question were destroyed by the IDF because of reported sniping, not tunnels.

Obviously you aren't aware of the tunnel digging going on in that very same area.

Quote[/b] ]

Why do you accuse Israel of no enthusiasm for "recognized borders"...

I didn't. Please read it again.

Read it yourself.

Quote[/b] ]Of course, such a wall would actually have to follow a recognised border so naturally there's not much Israeli enthusiasm for that.

Try being less cryptic by saying one thing and meaning another.

[theavonlady 2]

Political decisions made by foreign powers (i.e. Arab states, Arab League, etc.) does not justify keeping people from their property.

It does when those same nations and people are a hostile danger to your own country.

Please show me where Israel argued for keeping owners from their property on the basis of their "hostility" and that the UN accepted that argument.

Read the links I already provided.

Quote[/b] ]  Did Israel conduct interviews with each home owner to determine their level of hostility?

No. Can you show me a precedent where this was done?

Did the UN suggest that Israel do this?

Quote[/b] ]Israel's argument against the property owners returning was on the basis of the foreign powers' hostilities.  The home owners were just hostages.

Hostages to the their own bretehren's declared continued hostilities.

Wanna play word games? There.......... I'm playing.

Quote[/b] ]

Israel didn't put anyone in Refugee camps. The Arabs did and keep them there to this very day.

Of course they didn't.  The Serbs didn't put the Kosovars into refugee camps either.  It's not very common that refugees are hosted within the same country they fled from.  I'm surprised that this isn't more obvious to you.

Care to explain to the folks here why there are still refugee camps in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria, when these places have been under full Palestinian rule and control since 1993. I won't trouble you to give the same explanation for the years 1948 through 1993.

Quote[/b] ]

Victors in a defensive war dictating terms to the losing aggressor. You wish to call it "ransom"? Fine. Call it what you want.

Israel can dictate what ever terms it wants to the failed aggressors, but those terms should not dispossess  a civilian population that merely got caught in the middle.

The UN disagreed. Read my links again.

[Bernadotte 0]

Please read the article again.  The 30 dwellings and mosque in question were destroyed by the IDF because of reported sniping, not tunnels.

Obviously you aren't aware of the tunnel digging going on in that very same area.

How should I be aware of tunnels entering the destroyed mosque and 30 homes when the IDF didn't even report about them?

[theavonlady 2]

Please read the article again.  The 30 dwellings and mosque in question were destroyed by the IDF because of reported sniping, not tunnels.

Obviously you aren't aware of the tunnel digging going on in that very same area.

How should I be aware of tunnels entering the destroyed mosque and 30 homes when the IDF didn't even report about them?

From your article:

Quote[/b] ]Israel has demolished hundreds of houses in Rafah, near the Egyptian border, in more than three years of fighting, saying the buildings gave cover to gunmen and weapons smugglers.

Now you know.

See what happens when you don't read? This time your own posted link.

[Bernadotte 0]

Did Israel conduct interviews with each home owner to determine their level of hostility?

No. Can you show me a precedent where this was done?

Did the UN suggest that Israel do this?

Well, according to the UN statement quoted in your link: "refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date..."

How is it that Israel determined that all those hundreds of thousands of people forbidden from returning did not wish to live at peace with their neighbors, if not by interviewing them?  You don't suppose they just simply applied broad generalisations about their opionions, do you?

Quote[/b] ]Israel's argument against the property owners returning was on the basis of the foreign powers' hostilities.  The home owners were just hostages.

Hostages to the their own bretehren's declared continued hostilities.

Wanna play word games? There.......... I'm playing.

I know you are, but I'd really prefer not to play word games.  If Israel was depriving domestic civilians of their property until a foreign power met Israel's demands then those civilians were being held hostage by Israel, and not by the foreign power.

Quote[/b] ]

Israel didn't put anyone in Refugee camps. The Arabs did and keep them there to this very day.

Of course they didn't.  The Serbs didn't put the Kosovars into refugee camps either.  It's not very common that refugees are hosted within the same country they fled from.  I'm surprised that this isn't more obvious to you.

Care to explain to the folks here why there are still refugee camps in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria, when these places have been under full Palestinian rule and control since 1993.

Once again, they are in camps because Israel still refuses to allow them to return to their homes.

Israel can dictate what ever terms it wants to the failed aggressors, but those terms should not dispossess  a civilian population that merely got caught in the middle.

The UN disagreed. Read my links again.

I did.  The UN did not agree to the dispossession of the Palestinian civilian population that merely got caught in the middle of the conflict.

[Bernadotte 0]

Please read the article again.  The 30 dwellings and mosque in question were destroyed by the IDF because of reported sniping, not tunnels.

Obviously you aren't aware of the tunnel digging going on in that very same area.

How should I be aware of tunnels entering the destroyed mosque and 30 homes when the IDF didn't even report about them?

From your article:

Quote[/b] ]Israel has demolished hundreds of houses in Rafah, near the Egyptian border, in more than three years of fighting, saying the buildings gave cover to gunmen and weapons smugglers.

That statement does not refer to the mosque and 30 dwellings that the IDF demolished in this instance.  No where does it say that these particular buildings were used for weapons smuggling.

[theavonlady 2]

Did Israel conduct interviews with each home owner to determine their level of hostility?

No. Can you show me a precedent where this was done?

Did the UN suggest that Israel do this?

Well, according to the UN statement quoted in your link: "refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date..."

How is it that Israel determined that all those hundreds of thousands of people forbidden from returning did not wish to live at peace with their neighbors, if not by interviewing them?  You don't suppose they just simply applied broad generalisations about their opionions, do you?

My link states:

The United Nations took up the refugee issue and adopted Resolution 194 on December 11, 1948. This called upon the Arab states and Israel to resolve all outstanding issues through negotiations either directly, or with the help of the Palestine Conciliation Commission established by this resolution.

The UN did not call upon Israel to meet with individual property owners to resolve questions of beligerence.

BTW, here's another link for you:

MYTH: Palestinians who wanted to return to their homes posed no danger to Israeli security

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]Israel's argument against the property owners returning was on the basis of the foreign powers' hostilities.  The home owners were just hostages.

Hostages to the their own bretehren's declared continued hostilities.

Wanna play word games? There.......... I'm playing.

I know you are, but I'd really prefer not to play word games.

Then don't start.

Quote[/b] ]If Israel was depriving domestic civilians of their property until a foreign power met Israel's demands

Israel's demands? What about the UN's?

Quote[/b] ]then those civilians were being held hostage by Israel

Wow! Back to the word games so fast?!

They were held hostage by the Arabs, who said no dice until we get everything we want - all or nothing - including the disestablishment of Israel.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]

Israel didn't put anyone in Refugee camps. The Arabs did and keep them there to this very day.

Of course they didn't.  The Serbs didn't put the Kosovars into refugee camps either.  It's not very common that refugees are hosted within the same country they fled from.  I'm surprised that this isn't more obvious to you.

Care to explain to the folks here why there are still refugee camps in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria, when these places have been under full Palestinian rule and control since 1993.

Once again, they are in camps because Israel still refuses to allow them to return to their homes.

Off the mark again:

MYTH: The Arab states have always welcomed the Palestinians and done their best to resettle them

“The Arab States do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as an affront to the United Nations and as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders don't give a damn whether the refugees live or die.â€

— former director of UNRWA, Ralph Garroway, in August 1958

Quote[/b] ]

Israel can dictate what ever terms it wants to the failed aggressors, but those terms should not dispossess  a civilian population that merely got caught in the middle.

The UN disagreed. Read my links again.

I did.  The UN did not agree to the dispossession of the Palestinian civilian population that merely got caught in the middle of the conflict.

False. Resolution 194, Point 11:

that refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which under principles of international law or in equity should be made good by Governments or authorities responsible. Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of refugees and payment of compensation...

The emphasized words demonstrate that the UN recognized that Israel could not be expected to repatriate a hostile population that might endanger its security. The solution to the problem, like all previous refugee problems, would require at least some Palestinians to be resettled in Arab lands. Furthermore, the resolution uses the word "should" instead of "shall," which, in legal terms, is not mandatory language.

The resolution met most of Israel's concerns regarding the refugees, whom they regarded as a potential fifth-column if allowed to return unconditionally. The Israelis considered the settlement of the refugee issue a negotiable part of an overall peace settlement. As President Chaim Weizmann explained: "We are anxious to help such resettlement provided that real peace is established and the Arab states do their part of the job. The solution of the Arab problem can be achieved only through an all-around Middle East development scheme, toward which the United Nations, the Arab states and Israel will make their respective contributions.

[theavonlady 2]

Please read the article again.  The 30 dwellings and mosque in question were destroyed by the IDF because of reported sniping, not tunnels.

Obviously you aren't aware of the tunnel digging going on in that very same area.

How should I be aware of tunnels entering the destroyed mosque and 30 homes when the IDF didn't even report about them?

From your article:

Quote[/b] ]Israel has demolished hundreds of houses in Rafah, near the Egyptian border, in more than three years of fighting, saying the buildings gave cover to gunmen and weapons smugglers.

That statement does not refer to the mosque and 30 dwellings that the IDF demolished in this instance.  No where does it say that these particular buildings were used for weapons smuggling.

This is really getting childish.

I stated that your great military plan for Israel patroling the Rafiach area doesn't take into consideration weapons smuggling via tunnels.

As I asked:

How does this prevent smuggling via weapons tunnels?

Then I stated:

Obviously you aren't aware of the tunnel digging going on in that very same area.

To which you replied:

How should I be aware of tunnels entering the destroyed mosque and 30 homes when the IDF didn't even report about them?

To which I replied:

From your article

To which you now replied:

That statement does not refer to the mosque and 30 dwellings that the IDF demolished in this instance.

To which I now reply that I never said that the article's statement about weapons smuggling refers to the 30 demolished buildings.

I was referring to your military plan's lack of taking into consideration the weapons smuggling problem.

Once again, read carefully.

You may reply to this point further if you wish but I won't.

[miles teg 1]

Ah poor avon once again on her mission to prove that Islam is a barbaric religion and against jews bla blah ...

Seriously avon are you a islamic scholar or something?

Me? An Islamic scholar? No. Am I supposed to be one in order to read a news item on Yahoo?

Anyway, these guys claim to be Islamic scholars, in your home country, no less.

Let's read some of their - what you like to call - "blah blah":

"Two groups – the Jews and the Christians – are the main elements constituting the Camp of Kufr [unbelief] and will continue to be its two foundations until Allah allows their downfall and annihilation at the end of days...

When the Prophet Muhammad was sent out, the Camp of Kufr declared war on his message. At the center of this war were these groups, particularly the Jews. These two groups will continue to serve as the grindstones of the conflict and the war between belief and Kufr until eternity comes… The conflict will end when Jesus the son of Mary, peace be upon him, arrives to break the cross, and wipes it off the face of the earth, and kills the blind [false] Messiah, the leader of the Jews and the tyrant whom they await. Until that day, the conflict between us, the Muslims, and the Jews and Christians will continue, and it will ebb and flow, one day ours, another day theirs…

"The Jews are the objects of Allah's [promised] wrath, while the Christians deviate from the path of righteousness… The Qur'an described the Jews as a nation cursed by Allah, a nation at which he was angry – some of whom he turned into apes and pigs…"

- Sheikh Abd Al-'Aziz Qari, Preacher, Ka'ba Mosque, Al-Madina, Saudi Arabia

"There can be neither an agreement nor a meeting point between the people of Islam and the Jewish and Christian People of the Book… How can we permit the Catholic Pope's talk of a need to find meeting points and agreement between Islam and Christianity, so that there will be peaceful coexistence between the two religions and harmony between the two communities? Is it conceivable that there should be agreement and a meeting point with those who fabricate terrible falsehoods about Allah … claiming that Jesus, peace be upon him, is his son?!…"

- Sheikh Adnan Ahmad Siyami, Preacher, Mecca mosque, Saudi Arabia

"The Jews and Christians are infidels, enemies of Allah, his Messenger, and the believers. They deny and curse Allah and his Messenger… How can we draw near to these infidels …? They deny even the messengers sent to them. They do not believe in Moses, they do not believe in Jesus – because if they really believed in them, they would join Islam, because every prophet heralded to his nation the coming of the Prophet Muhammad and the need to believe in him…

"Some may say: 'How can the inventor of electricity be placed in Hell – he illuminated the world for us.' Others may say, 'How can we be hostile to the Jews and Christians when they invented and manufactured even the items we use in our mosques?' Still others may say, 'The messenger of Allah left his shield with a Jew and went to visit his sick Jewish neighbor. Why do you preach to us to do differently?' The truth is that this is an inversion of the facts, and deception. The Jew whom the Prophet considered a citizen had accepted the agreement [that the Prophet Muhammad had concluded with the Jews of Al-Madina] … and when his people violated that pact, and supported the polytheists instead of the Muslims, their punishment was death, captivity, and the expropriation of their assets.

"If the infidels live among the Muslims, in accordance with the conditions set out by the Prophet – there is nothing wrong with it provided they pay Jizya [9] to the Islamic treasury. Other conditions are … that they do not renovate a church or a monastery [and] do not rebuild ones that were destroyed, that they feed for three days any Muslim who passes by their homes … that they rise when a Muslim wishes to sit, that they do not imitate Muslims in dress and speech, nor ride horses, nor own swords, nor arm themselves with any kind of weapon; that they do not sell wine, do not show the cross, do not ring church bells, do not raise their voices during prayer, that they shave their hair in front so as to make them easily identifiable, do not incite anyone against the Muslims, and do not strike a Muslim… If they violate these conditions, they have no protection."

- Sheikh Marzouq Salem Al-Ghamdi, preacher, Al-Rahmah mosque, Mecca, Saudi Arabia

And here's a local yokel:

"Have no mercy on the Jews, no matter where they are, in any country. Fight them, wherever you are. Wherever you meet them, kill them. Wherever you are, kill those Jews and those Americans who are like them – and those who stand by them – they are all in one trench, against the Arabs and the Muslims – because they established Israel here, in the beating heart of the Arab world, in Palestine. They created it to be the outpost of their civilization – and the vanguard of their army, and to be the sword of the West and of the Crusaders, hanging over the necks of the monotheists, the Muslims in these lands. They wanted the Jews to be their spearhead… Allah, deal with the Jews, your enemies and the enemies of Islam. Deal with the crusaders, and America, and Europe behind them, O Lord of the worlds…"

- Sheikh Ahmad Abu Halabiya, member of the PA-appointed Fatwa Council and former acting rector of the Islamic University in Gaza, in a sermon from the Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Aal Nahyan mosque, Gaza, Palestinian Authority, broadcast on Palestinian Television, October 13, 2001

These are but of few of the myriad of verbatim quotations of theological sermons that are pronounced in mosques in Saudi Arabia, the Palestinian Authority, Europe, the United States - you name it.

Now I'm sure that I, being an ignorant Jewish infidel, have completely misunderstood the words and intentions of the above speakers. Please correct my misunderstandings.

For those of you who are interested in further disputing the above texts, you'll find those quotes and more in Contemporary Islamist Ideology Permitting Genocidal Murder, a paper just presented to the 2004 Stockholm International Forum on Preventing Genocide.

Quote[/b] ]Since you were adept enough to ASSUME something out of the paragraphs context without ANY solid evidence backing your stupid assumptions  

All I did was quote verbatim the relevant text of the AP new article.

Unlike you, I will repeat those parts of the article you chose to leave out, as did Bernadotte (coincidence?):

Quote[/b] ]In speaking of terrorists who killed fellow Muslims, al-Sheik was clearly referring to the Prophet Muhammad's final sermon, delivered on Mount Arafat 14 centuries ago.

It contained the line: "Know that every Muslim is a Muslim's brother, and the Muslims are brethren. Fighting between them should be avoided."

Now you go on to say:

Quote[/b] ]I dont usually bother correcting you

Maybe because you can't.

Quote[/b] ]but this is too much this time.

This is what was said:

"Is it holy war to shed Muslim blood? Is it holy war to shed the blood of non-Muslims given sanctuary in Muslim lands? Is it holy war to destroy the possessions of Muslims?" he <Sheik Abdul Aziz al-Sheik, telling 2 million pilgrims in Mecca>

DID it say anywhere that killing nonmuslims is not terrorism?

Once again, the sermon is about Moslems killing Moslems. Please quote me from a single sermon at the Hadj where someone preached the words "blwoing up buses, restaurants, planes, skyscrapers full of people is terrorism and a disgrace to Allah's name and divine message to the people of the world" or even slightly similar.

Go on. Give me a quote.

Quote[/b] ]You are VERY good at manipulaing sentences and using them for your own VILE purposes.

All verbatim quotes, just like the ones from your native country.

Quote[/b] ]ISLAM doesnt allow you to spill the blood of a NON MUSLIM nomatter WHEREEVER he is or who he works under or over. Until unless your attacked by him or hes a threat to your existence you WILL NOT ATTACK anyone be he a MUSLIM or a NON-MUSLIM until unless your in the battlefield/in a war.

Please explain the contradiction between what you're claiming and what Islamic clergymen are preaching to the masses.

Quote[/b] ]Its a pity not many muslims are on this forum to correct your baseless anti-islamic propaganda machine from where you spew out these crappy assumptions 24/7.

Better than the supression of the truth you spew out 9/11.

qUILL is also a Moslem. Let's ask him. qUILL?

Quote[/b] ]Bernadotte is right these sort of comments from you truly reflect your mentality.

Like you, Bernadotte has mostly not responded to the points I've brought up in the last few pages.

Go ahead. Make my day.

edit: note that all of the URLs for the quotes taken from the Alminbar.cc site are out of date, as the site has been completely redesigned, invalidating all prior URLs.

Avon Lady, these quotes are mostly from Wahabis which are extremists and unfortunately are the ones who are pushing much of the violence in the Middle East (even when they say they are not...they tend to speak out of both sides of their mouths).  

I can tell you for 100% certainty that not all Muslims believe this.  Those Sunni Muslims who are more oriented towards Sufism or who are Sufis (very few actually have the discipline to be true Sufis) are very interested in interfaith dialogue.  I belong to a Houston Texas based organization called the Institute for Interfaith Dialog which is run by Muslims.  

They are mostly Turkish unfortunately.  It's unforunte not because they're Turkish, but because they don't have alot of other Muslims from other countries joining their organization.

These are the people who I've been associating with for over a year now so I've had a chance to see how they live day to day and I can say that these people are really good people and very devoted Muslims.   The important thing is that they concentrate on being good people... not just to fellow Muslims but through people of all faiths.  Because of that they have had enormous success in converting Christians and Jews to Islam by leading through example and through the vastly different Sufi interpretations of the Qu'ran.  

The trick however...is how to change the belief systems of extremists to more moderate views...this may be impossible...however I get a sense that the vast majority of Muslims around the world are somewhere in the middle in their ideologies....they are caught between the reality of this world, and the fear that the extremists may be right by saying that by shirking off violent Jihad, they will suffer in the here-after.   Some of the also love the West...yet hate parts of its culture.  

It's a wierd paradox.   I have some Arab friends like this...caught in a paradox of beliefs.  

But to fight these extremists with GREATER violence will only feed their cause and justify their beliefs....and worse draw these moderates into their ranks.  

It is sadly already happening...and if it happens on a large scale we will see another world war and vast slaughter.

Oh also I must add, that the stuff by the PA authority, I recognize as being from the Qu'ran, however it is from BADLY interpretted Qu'ran. The big problem in Islamic studies is that everyone disagrees about the interpretation of the word "unbelievers". As far as I'm aware of, the Hadiths don't do much to clarify this issue. Sadly however, Islamic militants interpret it to mean Jews and/or Christians even though the context does not justify this. In addition normally when Jews and Christians are mentioned in the Qu'ran they are specifically named or are called "people of the book".

I believe there are also some verses in the Qu'ran about treating "people of the book" with respect. But I need to look it up. Currently I'm doing research on using the Qu'ran to fight against terrorism so for me this issue is incredibly important.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Bernadotte 0]

 

Well, according to the UN statement quoted in your link: "refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date..."

How is it that Israel determined that all those hundreds of thousands of people forbidden from returning did not wish to live at peace with their neighbors, if not by interviewing them?

My link states:

The United Nations took up the refugee issue and adopted Resolution 194 on December 11, 1948. This called upon the Arab states and Israel to resolve all outstanding issues through negotiations either directly, or with the help of the Palestine Conciliation Commission established by this resolution.

You've posted nothing indicating that Israel made any effort to determine if given property owners were prepared to live in peace within Israel.  Natually it was much easier to just label them all hostile, wasn't it?

And what about the 10s of thousands of refugees that remained internally displaced within Israel's borders?  Why did Israel keep them separated from their properties?

They were held hostage by the Arabs, who said no dice until we get everything we want - all or nothing - including the disestablishment of Israel.

Really?  Then why didn't the UN resolutions call upon the Arab states to allow the refugees to return, instead of Israel?

Care to explain to the folks here why there are still refugee camps in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria, when these places have been under full Palestinian rule and control since 1993.

Once again, they are in camps because Israel still refuses to allow them to return to their homes.

Off the mark again:

“The Arab States do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as an affront to the United Nations and as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders don't give a damn whether the refugees live or die.â€

— former director of UNRWA, Ralph Garroway, in August 1958

How does a quote about what was happening outside Israel in 1958 apply to a problem within Israel's borders after 1993?

 

Israel can dictate what ever terms it wants to the failed aggressors, but those terms should not dispossess  a civilian population that merely got caught in the middle.

The UN disagreed. Read my links again.

I did.  The UN did not agree to the dispossession of the Palestinian civilian population that merely got caught in the middle of the conflict.

False. Resolution 194, Point 11:

...

The word should might not equal shall but it definitely doesn't equal shall not. Your references contain lots of talk of repatriation, resettlement and compensation, but none of that is the same as dispossession.

So I repeat; the UN did not agree to the dispossession of the Palestinian civilian population that merely got caught in the middle of the conflict.  If you disagree then why don't you simply post the quote that says the UN supported dispossession?

[theavonlady 2]

Avon Lady, these quotes are mostly from Wahabis which are extremists and unfortunately are the ones who are pushing much of the violence in the Middle East (even when they say they are not...they tend to speak out of both sides of their mouths).

How many Wahabi Muslems are there in the world?

How many non-Wahabi Muslims disagree with these extreme statements?

How many Muslims went on the Hadj?

How many Muslims are these messages broadcast to and read about?

I never said that they have a monopoly representing Islam but you're only fooling yourself into thinking that their violent opinions are not in a large part accepted, even if only passively, by a greater audience.

I beg of you to find me counter quotes from my surroundings, from people that are influential to the masses. You will find one or two but they are meak and always seem to only come out during inter-faith conference publicity events. Then they disappear.

Quote[/b] ]I can tell you for 100% certainty that not all Muslims believe this.

Not arguing. My point is there is a tremendous amount of Islamic based barbarity to justify Israel's concerns of taking seriously the repeated calls in mosques worldwide to "slaughter the Jews".

Quote[/b] ]Those Sunni Muslims who are more oriented towards Sufism or who are Sufis (very few actually have the discipline to be true Sufis) are very interested in interfaith dialogue.  I belong to a Houston Texas based organization called the Institute for Interfaith Dialog which is run by Muslims.  

They are mostly Turkish unfortunately.

Israel, as you know, has a good raport with Turkey.

Quote[/b] ]It's unforunte not because they're Turkish, but because they don't have alot of other Muslims from other countries joining their organization.

Is there a reason for that?

And while you're mentioning Sunnis, what about Shi'ites?

Quote[/b] ]These are the people who I've been associating with for over a year now so I've had a chance to see how they live day to day and I can say that these people are really good people and very devoted Muslims.   The important thing is that they concentrate on being good people... not just to fellow Muslims but through people of all faiths.  Because of that they have had enormous success in converting Christians and Jews to Islam by leading through example and through the vastly different Sufi interpretations of the Qu'ran.

You are preaching to the converted (no, not to Islam but to the fact that their are many good people of all faiths worldwide).

Quote[/b] ]The trick however...is how to change the belief systems of extremists to more moderate views...this may be impossible...however I get a sense that the vast majority of Muslims around the world are somewhere in the middle in their ideologies....they are caught between the reality of this world, and the fear that the extremists may be right by saying that by shirking off violent Jihad, they will suffer in the here-after.

Well, I appreciate your "sense" but some of us have to live with the facts on the ground for the moment.

Quote[/b] ]Some of the also love the West...yet hate parts of its culture.

Me, too!

Quote[/b] ]But to fight these extremists with GREATER violence will only feed their cause and justify their beliefs....and worse draw these moderates into their ranks.

So we should lie down and let them slaughter us so that they'll feel glad all over?

Quote[/b] ]It is sadly already happening...and if it happens on a large scale we will see another world war and vast slaughter.

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile - hoping it will eat him last".

- Winston Churchill