Thu 5 Jul 2007
“The Israel Lobby” in Perspective
Posted by Mitchell Plitnick under United States , US-Israel Lobby , Jewish Community , Democrats , PromoMy piece, co-authored with Chris Toensing, a response to the John Mearsheimer-Steven Walt paper, “The Israel Lobby” can be found at the Middle East Report web site, or you can purchase the magazine, which would be even better.
July 7th, 2007 at 12:43 am
Sorry that I did not have the patience to read the entire piece. After 3-4 paragraphs it was fairly obvious where it was going.
1. If Israel (in reality) controlled the U.S. electorate, how come they can’t control even one other nation’s government???
I mean if ya think about it, wouldn’t it be MUCH easier to control a few smaller votes in the U.N., such as New Zealand, Guatemala and/or the Congo?
The answer is only common-sensical. Because the respect and support Israel has from the USA is earned, not purchased or bullied. The USA also supports Taiwan and unlike the case with Israel, the USA has a longstanding treaty to go to war with {YIKES!} 100-million Chinese armed forces, if Taiwan should be attacked. Sending a few boats of arms to Israel, who returns them with technological enhancements is no comparison.
BTW:
The Truman, Eisenhower and Nixon story:
The Dulles brothers (as in Dulles Airport) had numerous high-ranking Nazi clients. In return for the Zionists dropping their war crimes claims on these people (and many others), the USA, including the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey (Rocafeller) went to work helping get votes in the U.N. for the Israel resolution.
(”The Secret War Against the Jews” Luftis & Aarons)
Nixon (as D.D.E.’s VP) actually ran a recruitment and immigration drive to bring Nazis from the Balkans into the USA to counteract growing Jewish and Zionist sympathy and support.
You guys don’t get it. Since oil became the center of industrial power, the Jews fell to the bottom of the totem-pole,. where they remain to this day. The only reason the Palestinian-Arabs appear to be below the Israelis is because the Arabs have no cultural support systems to save their brothers and sisters from poverty and despair. You couldn’t be further wrong if you were sound asleep.
July 7th, 2007 at 12:56 am
PS:
Newsflash}}}
Anyone who expects me to be completely sane after what I have been through and seen, are themselves delusional . .
July 8th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
I like this article a lot.
In particular, I noticed/appreciated these parts:
The fledgling state was more European than Middle Eastern in orientation, providing common cultural ground.
and
What Khalilzad came up with stunned Washington when the draft was leaked to the press: The US was uniquely qualified to be the sole superpower, and to maintain that status, the US should actively block the rise of any possible rival.[19]
Khalilzad was specific: “In the Middle East and Southwest Asia, our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the region and preserve US and Western access to the region’s oil.” The White House swiftly disowned the document, but it found an appreciative reader in Dick Cheney. “You’ve discovered a new rationale for our role in the world,” Khalilzad recalls being told by his boss.[20] Rebuilding America’s Defenses cites the 1992 Defense Policy Guidance as its primary intellectual inspiration.[21] When the Cheney Defense Department was reunited in the administration of George W. Bush, much of this “inspiration” made its way into the 2002 National Security Strategy.
Common cultural ground isn’t some amorphous thing. Europeans (and their offshoots like the US, Canada etc) have always been about domination, that is a trackable cultural core. The state of Israel is, in its actions and cultural perspectives, clearly part of that pattern.
And apparently, some European-ancestry Jews have decided it’s better to join the ugly, assuming that being part of the imperialist domination will protect us from being targets. Israel is fully and actively joining the very system that has hurt and targeted “its” Jews for a long time. But the positioning of Israel on the world stage isn’t going to provide that protection.
Given the above, it’s also important to me to highlight the references to the Christian right in the article. Pro-Israel is not identical to Jewish.
(note: please don’t add the above email to your email list, I am already receiving the newsletter through my primary account that I don’t use on the net).
July 9th, 2007 at 9:40 am
I received this from a Christian friend:
http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/C/can_you_believe_it/debates/talking_point_jews.html
Richard Littlejohn wrote: “Bitterness over Israeli policies towards the Palestinians has provided fertile ground for antisemitic ideas, which have been transplanted from their Christian European soil into the Arab world. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion can now be bought in some radical Islamist shops in Britain.”
Valerie,
Thanks for this article. You live in Northern Ireland? Do you see a lot of anger toward Israel?
I think this is simply an excuse to cloak anti-Semitism. People that are bitter over Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians, I believe were anti-Semitic already. This site has a poll on it of mostly Christian readers Valerie?
Notice the results:
Criticism of Israel or Zionism is usually a cloak for hostility to Jews 42%
Israel’s actions against the Palestinians are generating antisemitism 11%
It is possible to criticise Israel and Zionism and also to oppose antisemitism 47%
Fifty eight percent (better than half) believe Israel’s actions are generating antisemitism and / or it is possible to criticize Israel and Zionism and not be anti-Semitic.
Steve
July 9th, 2007 at 11:43 pm
” “No lobby,” they write, “has managed to divert US foreign policy as far from what the American national interest would otherwise suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that US and Israeli interests are essentially identical.” ”
i didn’t see anything in the article defining american national interest. obviously, that’s an opinion. many of us think that what the current US administration is doing is not in the american national interest, but the ones doing it think that it is.
and the war in iraq has not been good for israel at all, so there’s an example of differing interests, in which the US did what was bad for israel.
lots of countries have lobbies. there is a pro-japan lobby, a pro-china lobby, etc. I don’t see you freaking out over those. i can’t help but wonder why.
michelle says: “Europeans (and their offshoots like the US, Canada etc) have always been about domination, that is a trackable cultural core. ”
michelle, don’t you think that’s a human trait, not a european trait? the native american groups were always at war with each other, and were often quite cruel. islam has a terrible history of violence and oppression; study the moghuls of india. the europeans had the technology when the time came, due to a quirk of history. it is a myth to believe that native peoples are all peaceful and loving and europeans are nasty imperialists.
and if the reason for the US support of israel was to control middle east oil, which is the 2nd thing you appreciated, then it was a really dumb move to choose to support the only country in the region that doesn’t have any oil.
as is is, both jews and arabs lived in palestine. the jews were willing to share the land, the arabs never were. i’m sorry that (almost all of) the jews of the arab lands left those countries and went to israel, and that (some of the) arabs in israel left. i’m even sorrier that they were forced into refugee camps by their arab brothers.
israel left gaza, and was rewarded with constant rocket fire. seriously, what would you have israel do? disappear?
“Pro-Israel is not identical to Jewish.”
you don’t have to be jewish to be pro-israel, but to support israel without supporting her jewish identity is not really supporting her, it’s conditional.
July 10th, 2007 at 4:59 am
Real Voice:
I essentially agree with your points.
Perhaps what Michelle meant with her comment re: “Pro-Israel is not identical to Jewish.” is that she may be objecting to Jews being heaped into a category of all supporting Israel.
(Translation: Good Jew -v- Bad Jew).
You wrote:
“if the reason for the US support of israel was to control middle east oil, which is the 2nd thing you appreciated, then it was a really dumb move to choose to support the only country in the region that doesn’t have any oil.”
Go a step further. Had the USA cooperated with the Arab Nations in their (post WW2) drive to wipe Israel off the map, it would have certainly consolidated the USAs leverage with the oil producers. Of course, that too would have likely only been of a short-term benefit, as the various Arab nations are famous for their temporal stratigic associations. Temporal or not, it would have been a stronger position then taking the sides of the “half-ape, half-pig” people.
Where I disagree is with your statement:
“it is a myth to believe that native peoples are all peaceful and loving and europeans are nasty imperialists.”
Europeans were, for the most part and for the greater portion of the past 2,000 years, very nasty imperialists. While the “First Reich” were the Romans and the Third the Germans, in between were other powers such as England, who, has basically screwed up every shore she touched. And lets not neglect to mention Spain and her violent conquest of South and Central America, for the gold and oops, I almost forgot, to spread the word of God.
Native speoples: Some nasty and violent and some peaceful. The Native Americans were not always at war with one another. Certainly less so then the tribes of the Balkans, during the late 1800s and througout most of the 20th Century. The Cherokee nation was very friendly, as were (to greater or lesser extents) many other Indian tribes.
July 10th, 2007 at 7:18 am
“Pro-Israel is not identical to Jewish.”
Michelle can speak for herself, but my take on this is that Christian Zionists do not really wish Jews well “in the end.” They are only interested in the Jews controlling all of Greater Israel as the pre-condition for the return of Christ, at which point they believe Jesus will slaughter all those Jews who have not accepted his messiaship. Did I mention they were nuts?
July 10th, 2007 at 8:38 am
And the Muslims also believe in the return of Jesus (Isa) who they understand will break all the crosses in the world and complete the worldwide conversion to Islam.
The Hebrews, for their scriptural part believe that the Messaiah will return and lead the flock triumphantly to victory against the oppressors who they believe will start a worldwide colamity.
Isn’t everyone better off believing in my spiritual interpretations?
July 10th, 2007 at 8:50 am
Muslims also believe in the return of Jesus (Isa) who they understand will break all the crosses in the world and complete the worldwide conversion to Islam.
Do you just make this nonsense up out of your head, Isidor? This is complete crap. Not all Muslims even believe that Isa will return, and those that do believe he will destroy the Antichrist. For another thing,
Surah 2:62
“Those who believe in this revelation, and those who follow the Jewish faith, and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and do righteous deeds, shall have their reward with their Lord; they have nothing to fear, nor shall they grieve.”
July 10th, 2007 at 9:52 am
John:
I do not quote holy scripture made up in my head. You want to begin trading Surahs? Get ready:
Qur’an:9:88 “The Messenger and those who believe with him, strive hard and fight with their wealth and lives in Allah’s Cause.”
Qur’an:9:5 “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”
Qur’an:9:112 “The Believers fight in Allah’s Cause, they slay and are slain, kill and are killed.”
Qur’an:9:29 “Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission.”
Ishaq:325 “Muslims, fight in Allah’s Cause. Stand firm and you will prosper. Help the Prophet, obey him, give him your allegiance, and your religion will be victorious.”
Qur’an:8:39 “Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.”
Qur’an:8:39 “So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).”
Ishaq:324 “He said, ‘Fight them so that there is no more rebellion, and religion, all of it, is for Allah only. Allah must have no rivals.’”
Qur’an:9:14 “Fight them and Allah will punish them by your hands, lay them low, and cover them with shame. He will help you over them.”
Ishaq:300 “I am fighting in Allah’s service. This is piety and a good deed. In Allah’s war I do not fear as others should. For this fighting is righteous, true, and good.”
Ishaq:587 “Our onslaught will not be a weak faltering affair. We shall fight as long as we live. We will fight until you turn to Islam, humbly seeking refuge. We will fight not caring whom we meet. We will fight whether we destroy ancient holdings or newly gotten gains. We have mutilated every opponent. We have driven them violently before us at the command of Allah and Islam. We will fight until our religion is established. And we will plunder them, for they must suffer disgrace.”
Qur’an:8:65 “O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding.”
Ishaq:326 “Prophet exhort the believers to fight. If there are twenty good fighters they will defeat two hundred for they are a senseless people. They do not fight with good intentions nor for truth.”
Bukhari:V4B52N63 “A man whose face was covered with an iron mask came to the Prophet and said, ‘Allah’s Apostle! Shall I fight or embrace Islam first?’ The Prophet said, ‘Embrace Islam first and then fight.’ So he embraced Islam, and was martyred. Allah’s Apostle said, ‘A Little work, but a great reward.’”
Bukhari:V4B53N386 “Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah alone or pay us the Jizyah tribute tax in submission. Our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says: ‘Whoever amongst us is killed as a martyr shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever survives shall become your master.’”
Muslim:C34B20N4668 “The Messenger said: ‘Anybody who equips a warrior going to fight in the Way of Allah is like one who actually fights. And anybody who looks after his family in his absence is also like one who actually fights.”
Qur’an:9:38 “Believers, what is the matter with you, that when you are asked to go forth and fight in Allah’s Cause you cling to the earth? Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? Unless you go forth, He will afflict and punish you with a painful doom, and put others in your place.”
Qur’an:9:123 “Fight the unbelievers around you, and let them find harshness in you.”
Qur’an:8:72 “Those who accepted Islam and left their homes to fight in Allah’s Cause with their possessions and persons, and those who gave (them) asylum, aid, and shelter, those who harbored them - these are allies of one another. You are not responsible for protecting those who embraced Islam but did not leave their homes [to fight] until they do so.” [Another translation reads:] “You are only called to protect Muslims who fight.”
Muslim:C9B1N31 “I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify to the fact that there is no god but Allah, and believe in me (that) I am the Messenger and in all that I have brought.”
Bukhari:V9B84N59 “Whoever says this will save his property and life from me.’”
Qur’an:8:73 “The unbelieving infidels are allies. Unless you (Muslims) aid each other (fighting as one united block to make Allah’s religion victorious), there will be confusion and mischief. Those who accepted Islam, left their homes to fight in Allah’s Cause (al-Jihad), as well as those who give them asylum, shelter, and aid - these are (all) Believers: for them is pardon and bountiful provision (in Paradise).”
Tabari IX:69 “Arabs are the most noble people in lineage, the most prominent, and the best in deeds. We were the first to respond to the call of the Prophet. We are Allah’s helpers and the viziers of His Messenger. We fight people until they believe in Allah. He who believes in Allah and His Messenger has protected his life and possessions from us. As for one who disbelieves, we will fight him forever in the Cause of Allah. Killing him is a small matter to us.”
Qur’an:48:16 “Say (Muhammad) to the wandering desert Arabs who lagged behind: ‘You shall be invited to fight against a people given to war with mighty prowess. You shall fight them until they surrender and submit. If you obey, Allah will grant you a reward, but if you turn back, as you did before, He will punish you with a grievous torture.”
Qur’an:48:22 “If the unbelieving infidels fight against you, they will retreat. (Such has been) the practice (approved) of Allah in the past: no change will you find in the ways of Allah.”
Qur’an:47:4 “When you clash with the unbelieving Infidels in battle (fighting Jihad in Allah’s Cause), smite their necks until you overpower them, killing and wounding many of them. At length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly, making (them) captives. Thereafter either generosity or ransom (them based upon what benefits Islam) until the war lays down its burdens. Thus are you commanded by Allah to continue carrying out Jihad against the unbelieving infidels until they submit to Islam.”
Qur’an:47:31 “And We shall try you until We know those among you who are the fighters.”
Tabari VI:138 “Those present at the oath of Aqabah had sworn an allegiance to Muhammad. It was a pledge of war against all men. Allah had permitted fighting.”
Tabari VI:139 “Allah had given his Messenger permission to fight by revealing the verse ‘And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah.’”
Qur’an:9:19 “Do you make the giving of drink to pilgrims, or the maintenance of the Mosque, equal to those who fight in the Cause of Allah? They are not comparable in the sight of Allah. Those who believe, and left their homes, striving with might, fighting in Allah’s Cause with their goods and their lives, have the highest rank in the sight of Allah.”
Ishaq:550 “The Muslims met them with their swords. They cut through many arms and skulls. Only confused cries and groans could be heard over our battle roars and snarling.”
Qur’an:5:94 “Believers, Allah will make a test for you in the form of a little game in which you reach out for your lances. Any who fails this test will have a grievous punishment.”
Ishaq:578 “Crushing the heads of the infidels and splitting their skulls with sharp swords, we continually thrust and cut at the enemy. Blood gushed from their deep wounds as the battle wore them down. We conquered bearing the Prophet’s fluttering war banner. Our cavalry was submerged in rising dust, and our spears quivered, but by us the Prophet gained victory.”
Tabari IX:22 “The Prophet continued to besiege the town, fighting them bitterly.”
Tabari IX:25 “By Allah, I did not come to fight for nothing. I wanted a victory over Ta’if so that I might obtain a slave girl from them and make her pregnant.”
Tabari IX:82 “The Messenger sent Khalid with an army of 400 to Harith [a South Arabian tribe] and ordered him to invite them to Islam for three days before he fought them. If they were to respond and submit, he was to teach them the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of His Prophet, and the requirements of Islam. If they should decline, then he was to fight them.”
Tabari IX:88 “Abdallah Azdi came to the Messenger, embraced Islam, and became a good Muslim. Allah’s Apostle invested Azdi with the authority over those who had surrendered and ordered him to fight the infidels from the tribes of Yemen. Azdi left with an army by the Messenger’s command. The Muslims besieged them for a month. Then they withdrew, setting a trap. When the Yemenites went in pursuit, Azdi was able to inflict a heavy loss on them.”
Ishaq:530 “Get out of his way, you infidel unbelievers. Every good thing goes with the Apostle. Lord, I believe in his word. We will fight you about its interpretations as we have fought you about its revelation with strokes that will remove heads from shoulders and make enemies of friends.”
Muslim:C9B1N29 “Command For Fighting Against People So Long As They Do Not Profess That There Is No Ilah (God) But Allah And Muhammad Is His Messenger: When the Messenger breathed his last and Bakr was appointed Caliph, many Arabs chose to become apostates [rejected Islam]. Abu Bakr said: ‘I will definitely fight against anyone who stops paying the Zakat tax, for it is an obligation. I will fight against them even to secure the cord used for hobbling the feet of a camel which they used to pay if they withhold it now.’ Allah had justified fighting against those who refused to pay Zakat.”
Muslim:C9B1N33 “The Prophet said: ‘I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and they establish prostration prayer, and pay Zakat. If they do it, their blood and property are protected.’”
Muslim:C10B1N176 “Muhammad (may peace be upon him) sent us in a raiding party. We raided Huraqat in the morning. I caught hold of a man and he said: ‘There is no god but Allah,’ but I attacked him with a spear anyway. It once occurred to me that I should ask the Apostle about this. The Messenger said: ‘Did he profess “There is no god but Allah,” and even then you killed him?’ I said: ‘He made a profession out of the fear of the weapon I was threatening him with.’ The Prophet said: ‘Did you tear out his heart in order to find out whether it had professed truly or not?’”
Muslim:C20B1N4597 “The Prophet said at the conquest of Mecca: ‘There is no migration now, but only Jihad, fighting for the Cause of Islam. When you are asked to set out on a Jihad expedition, you should readily do so.’”
Muslim:C28B20N4628 “Allah has undertaken to provide for one who leaves his home to fight for His Cause and to affirm the truth of His word; Allah will either admit him to Paradise or will bring him back home with his reward and booty.”
Muslim:C28B20N4629 “The Messenger said: ‘One who is wounded in the Way of Allah - and Allah knows best who is wounded in His Way - will appear on the Day of Judgment with his wound still bleeding. The color (of its discharge) will be blood, (but) its smell will be musk.’”
Muslim:C34B20N4652-3 “The Merit Of Jihad And Of Keeping Vigilance Over The Enemy: A man came to the Holy Prophet and said: ‘Who is the best of men?’ He replied: ‘A man who fights staking his life and spending his wealth in Allah’s Cause.’”
Muslim:C42B20N4684 “A desert Arab came to the Prophet and said: ‘Messenger, one man fights for the spoils of war; another fights that he may be remembered, and one fights that he may see his (high) position (achieved as a result of his valor in fighting). Which of these is fighting in the Cause of Allah?’ The Messenger of Allah said: ‘Who fights so that the word of Allah is exalted is fighting in the Way of Allah.’”
Muslim:C53B20N4717 “The Prophet said: ‘This religion will continue to exist, and a group of people from the Muslims will continue to fight for its protection until the Hour is established.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N288 “I witnessed a scene that was dearer to me than anything I had ever seen. Aswad came to the Prophet while Muhammad was urging the Muslims to fight the pagans. He said, ‘We shall fight on your right and on your left and in front of you and behind you.’ I saw the face of the Prophet getting bright with happiness, for that saying delighted him.”
Bukhari:V5B59N290 “The believers who did not join the Ghazwa [Islamic raid or invasion] and those who fought are not equal in reward.”
Qur’an:2:193 “Fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief) and religion is only for Allah. But if they cease/desist, let there be no hostility except against infidel disbelievers.”
Qur’an:2:217 “They question you concerning fighting in the sacred month. Say: ‘Fighting therein is a grave (matter); but to prevent access to Allah, to deny Him, to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, to expel its members, and polytheism are worse than slaughter. Nor will they cease fighting you until they make you renegades from your religion. If any of you turn back and die in unbelief, your works will be lost and you will go to Hell. Surely those who believe and leave their homes to fight in Allah’s Cause have the hope of Allah’s mercy.”
Qur’an:2:244 “Fight in Allah’s Cause, and know that Allah hears and knows all.”
Qur’an:2:246 “He said: ‘Would you refrain from fighting if fighting were prescribed for you?’ They said: ‘How could we refuse to fight in Allah’s Cause?’”
Ishaq:280 “The Apostle prepared for war in pursuance of Allah’s command to fight his enemies and to fight the infidels who Allah commanded him to fight.”
Qur’an:61:2 “O Muslims, why say one thing and do another? Grievously odious and hateful is it in the sight of Allah that you say that which you do not. Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in a battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure.”
Bukhari:V4B52N61 “Allah’s Apostle! We were absent from the first battle you fought against the pagans. If Allah gives us a chance to do battle, no doubt, He will see how bravely we fight.”
Ishaq:398 “Ask them for their help. Thereby make the religion of Islam agreeable to them. And when you are resolved in the matter of religion concerning fighting your enemy you will have the advantage.”
Qur’an:3:146 “How many prophets fought in Allah’s Cause? With them (fought) myriads of godly men who were slain. They never lost heart if they met with disaster in Allah’s Cause, nor did they weaken nor give in. Allah loves those who are firm and steadfast [warriors].”
Ishaq:393 “How many prophets has death in battle befallen and how many multitudes with him? They did not show weakness toward their enemies and were not humiliated when they suffered in the fight for Allah and their religion. That is steadfastness. Allah loves the steadfast.”
Qur’an:3:153 “Behold! You ran off precipitately, climbing up the high hill without even casting a side glance at anyone, while the Messenger in your rear is calling you from your rear, urging you to fight. Allah gave you one distress after another by way of requital, to teach you not to grieve for the booty that had escaped you and for (the ill) that had befallen you.”
Qur’an:3:154 “Say: ‘Even if you had remained in your houses, those ordained to be slaughtered would have gone forth to the places where they were to slain.”
Ishaq:440 “Helped by the Holy Spirit we smited Muhammad’s foes. The Apostle sent a message to them with a sharp cutting sword.”
Ishaq:470 “We attacked them fully armed, swords in hand, cutting through heads and skulls.”
Qur’an:61:4 “Surely Allah loves those who fight in His Cause.”
Qur’an:61:11 “Believers, shall I lead you to a bargain or trade that will save you from a painful torment? That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad), and that you strive and fight in Allah’s Cause with your property and your lives: That will be best for you!” Qur’an 61:12 “He will forgive you your sins, and admit you to Gardens under which rivers flow, and to beautiful mansions in Eden: that is indeed the Supreme Achievement. And another (favor) which you love: help from Allah for a speedy victory over your enemies.”
Qur’an:8:5 “Your Lord ordered you out of your homes to fight for the true cause, even though some Muslims disliked it, and were averse (to fighting).”
Qur’an:24:53 “They swear their strongest oaths saying that if only you would command them. They would leave their homes (and go forth fighting in Allah’s Cause). Say: ‘Swear not; Obedience is (more) reasonable.’”
Qur’an:4:74 “Let those who fight in Allah’s Cause sell this world’s life for the hereafter. To him who fights in Allah’s Cause, whether he is slain or victorious, We shall give him a reward.”
Qur’an:4:75 “What reason have you that you should not fight in Allah’s Cause?” [Another translation says:] “What is wrong with you that you do not fight for Allah?”
Qur’an:4:76 “Those who believe fight in the Cause of Allah.”
Qur’an:4:77 “Have you not seen those to whom it was said: Withhold from fighting, perform the prayer and pay the zakat. But when orders for fighting were issued, a party of them feared men as they ought to have feared Allah. They say: ‘Our Lord, why have You ordained fighting for us, why have You made war compulsory?’”
Qur’an:4:78 “Wherever you are, death will find you, even if you are in towers strong and high! So what is wrong with these people, that they fail to understand these simple words?”
Qur’an:4:84 “Then fight (Muhammad) in Allah’s Cause. Incite the believers to fight with you.”
Qur’an:4:94 “Believers, when you go abroad to fight wars in Allah’s Cause, investigate carefully, and say not to anyone who greets you: ‘You are not a believer!’ Coveting the chance profits of this life (so that you may despoil him). With Allah are plenteous spoils and booty.”
Qur’an:4:95 “Not equal are believers who sit home and receive no hurt and those who fight in Allah’s Cause with their wealth and lives. Allah has granted a grade higher to those who fight with their possessions and bodies to those who sit home. Those who fight He has distinguished with a special reward.”
Qur’an:4:100 “He who leaves his home in Allah’s Cause finds abundant resources and many a refuge. Should he die as a refugee for Allah and His Messenger His reward becomes due and sure with Allah. When you travel through the earth there is no blame on you if you curtail your worship for fear unbelievers may attack you. In truth the disbelievers are your enemy.”
Qur’an:4:102 “When you (Prophet) lead them in prayer, let some stand with you, taking their arms with them. When they finish their prostrations, let them take positions in the rear. And let others who have not yet prayed come - taking all precaution, and bearing arms. The Infidels wish, if you were negligent of your arms, to assault you in a rush. But there is no blame on you if you put away your arms because of the inconvenience of rain or because you are ill; but take precaution. For the Unbelieving Infidels Allah hath prepared a humiliating punishment.”
Qur’an:4:104 “And do not relent in pursuing the enemy.”
July 10th, 2007 at 9:53 am
Terrorism:
Bukhari:V4B52N220 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror.’”
Qur’an:8:12 “I shall terrorize the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and His Apostle.”
Qur’an:8:57 “If you gain mastery over them in battle, inflict such a defeat as would terrorize them, so that they would learn a lesson and be warned.”
Ishaq:326 “If you come upon them, deal so forcibly as to terrify those who would follow, that they may be warned. Make a severe example of them by terrorizing Allah’s enemies.”
Qur’an:8:67 “It is not fitting for any prophet to have prisoners until he has made a great slaughter in the land.”
Ishaq:588 “When the Apostle descends on your land none of your people will be left when he leaves.”
Tabari IX:42 “We have been dealt a situation from which there is no escape. You have seen what Muhammad has done. Arabs have submitted to him and we do not have the strength to fight. You know that no herd is safe from him. And no one even dares go outside for fear of being terrorized.”
Ishaq:326 “Allah said, ‘No Prophet before Muhammad took booty from his enemy nor prisoners for ransom.’ Muhammad said, ‘I was made victorious with terror. The earth was made a place for me to clean. I was given the most powerful words. Booty was made lawful for me. I was given the power to intercede. These five privileges were awarded to no prophet before me.’”
Ishaq:327 “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”
Qur’an:7:3 “Little do you remember My warning. How many towns have We destroyed as a raid by night? Our punishment took them suddenly while they slept for their afternoon rest. Our terror came to them; Our punishment overtook them.”
Ishaq:510 “When the Apostle looked down on Khaybar he told his Companions, ‘O Allah, Lord of the Devils and what into terror they throw, and Lord of the winds and what they winnow, we ask Thee for the booty of this town and its people. Forward in the name of Allah.’ He used to say this of every town he raided.”
Bukhari:V5B59N512 “The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer [Prayer of Fear] near Khaybar when it was still dark. He said, ‘Allahu-Akbar!’ [Allah is Greatest] Khaybar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a hostile nation to fight, then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.’ Then the inhabitants came out running on their roads. The Prophet had their men killed; their children and woman were taken as captives.”
Bukhari:V9B87N127 “The Prophet said, ‘I have been given the keys of eloquent speech and given victory with terror.’”
Ishaq:517 “Khaybar was stormed by the Apostle’s squadron, fully armed, powerful and strong. It brought certain humiliation with Muslim men in its midst. We attacked and they met their doom. Muhammad conquered the Jews in fighting that day as they opened their eyes to our dust.”
Tabari VIII:116
Ishaq:511 “So Muhammad began seizing their herds and their property bit by bit. He conquered home by home. The Messenger took some people captive, including Safiyah and her two cousins. The Prophet chose Safiyah for himself.”
Bukhari:V5B59N512 “The Prophet had their men killed, their children and woman taken captive.”
Tabari VIII:129 “After the Messenger had finished with the Khaybar Jews, Allah cast terror into the hearts of the Jews in Fadak when they received news of what Allah had brought upon Khaybar. Fadak became the exclusive property of Allah’s Messenger.”
Tabari VIII:133 “The raiding party went to Tha’labah. One of Muhammad’s slaves, said, ‘Prophet, I know where Tha’labah can be taken by surprise.’ So Muhammad sent him with 130 men. They raided the town and drove off camels and sheep, bringing them back to Medina.”
Tabari VIII:138 “Muhammad carried arms, helmets, and spears. He led a hundred horses, appointing Bahir to be in charge of the weapons and Maslamah to be in charge of the horses. When the Quraysh received word of this, it frightened them.”
Qur’an:33:26 “Allah made the Jews leave their homes by terrorizing them so that you killed some and made many captive. And He made you inherit their lands, their homes, and their wealth. He gave you a country you had not traversed before.”
Qur’an:59:2 “It was Allah who drove the [Jewish] People of the Book from their homes and into exile. They refused to believe and imagined that their strongholds would protect them against Allah. But Allah came at them from where they did not suspect, and filled their hearts with terror. Their homes were destroyed. So learn a lesson, O men who have eyes. This is My warning…they shall taste the torment of Fire.”
Qur’an:33:60 “Truly, if the Hypocrites stir up sedition, if the agitators in the City do not desist, We shall urge you to go against them and set you over them. Then they will not be able to stay as your neighbors for any length of time. They shall have a curse on them. Whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain without mercy - a fierce slaughter - murdered, a horrible murdering.”
Tabari VIII:143 “In this year a twenty-four man raiding party led by Shuja went to the Banu Amir. He launched a raid on them and took camels and sheep. The shares of booty came to fifteen camels for each man. Also a raid led by Amr went to Dhat. He set out with fifteen men. He encountered a large force whom he summoned to Islam. They refused to respond so he killed all of them.”
Bukhari:V4B52N256 “The Prophet passed by and was asked whether it was permissible to attack infidels at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, ‘Their women and children are from them.’”
Tabari IX:20 “The captives of Hunayn, along with their possessions, were brought to the Messenger. He ordered that their captives, animals, and their possessions be taken to Ji’ranah and held there in custody.”
Ishaq:576 “Allah and His servant overwhelmed every coward. Allah honored us and made our religion victorious. We were glorified and destroyed them all. Allah humiliated them in the worship of Satan. By what our Apostle recites from the Book and by our swift horses, I liked the punishment the infidels received. Killing them was sweeter than drink. We galloped among them panting for the spoil. With our loud-voiced army, the Apostle’s squadron advanced into the fray.”
Ishaq:580 “Our strong warriors obey his orders to the letter. By us Allah’s religion is undeniably strong. You would think when our horses gallop with bits in their mouths that the sounds of demons are among them. The day we trod down the unbelievers there was no deviation or turning from the Apostle’s order. During the battle the people heard our exhortations to fight and the smashing of skulls by swords that sent heads flying. We severed necks with a warrior’s blow. Often we have left the slain cut to pieces and a widow crying alas over her mutilated husband. ‘Tis Allah, not man we seek to please.”
Tabari IX:122 “Muhammad sent Uyaynah to raid The Banu Anbar. They killed some people and took others captive. Asma was one of the women taken prisoner.”
Tabari IX:123 “Muhammad sent an expedition to Ghalib and to the land of the Banu Murrah. The raid on Amr and Abi was sent to the valley of Idam. Another by Aslami was sent to Ghabah. And Abd al-Rahman was ordered by the Messenger to lead an army to the seashore.”
Tabari IX:69 “He who believes in Allah and His Messenger has protected his life and possessions from us. As for those who disbelieve, we will fight them forever in the Cause of Allah. Killing them is a small matter to us.”
Bukhari:V5B59N516 “When Allah’s Apostle fought or raided people we raised our voices saying, ‘Allahu-Akbar! Allahu-Akbar! None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’”
Tabari VII:10 “In Ramadhan, seven months after the Hijrah, Muhammad entrusted a white war banner to Hamzah with the command of thirty Emigrants. Their aim was to intercept a Quraysh caravan.”
Ishaq:281 “The Raid on Waddan was the first Maghazi [invasion]. The Expedition of Harith was second. They encountered a large number of Quraysh in the Hijaz. Abu Bakr composed a poem about the raid: ‘When we called them to the truth they turned their backs and howled like bitches. Allah’s punishment on them will not tarry. I swear by the Lord of Camels [Allah?] that I am no perjurer. A valiant band will descend upon the Quraysh which will leave women husbandless. It will leave men dead, with vultures wheeling round. It will not spare the infidels.’”
Ishaq:285 “Then the Apostle went raiding in the month of Rabi u’l-Awwal making for the Quraysh. Then he raided the Quraysh by way of Dinar.”
Tabari VII:11 “In this year the Messenger entrusted to Sa’d a white war banner for the expedition to Kharrar. Sa’d said, ‘I set out on foot at the head of twenty men. We used to lie hidden by day and march at night, until we reached Kharrar on the fifth morning. The caravan had arrived in town a day before. There were sixty men with it.”
Tabari VII:11 “The Messenger of Allah went out on a raid as far as Waddan, searching for Quraysh.”
Tabari VII:15 “Expeditions Led by Allah’s Messenger: In this year, according to all Sira writers, the Messenger personally led the Ghazwa of Alwa. [A Ghazwa is an Islamic Invasion in Allah’s Cause consisting of an army unit led by the Prophet himself.] He left Sa’d in command of Medina. On this raid his banner was carried by Hamzah. He stayed out for fifteen days and then returned to Medina. The Messenger went on a Ghazwa at the head of two hundred of his companions in October, 623 and reached Buwat. His intention was to intercept a Quraysh caravan with a hundred men and twenty-five hundred camels.”
Ishaq:286 “Meanwhile the Apostle sent Sa’d on the raid of Abu Waqqas. The Prophet only stayed a few nights in Medina before raiding Ushayra and then Kurz.”
Bukhari:V5B57N51 “The Apostle said, ‘Tomorrow I will give the flag to a man whose leadership Allah will use to grant a Muslim victory.”
Bukhari:V5B59N569 “I fought in seven Ghazwat battles along with the Prophet and fought in nine Maghazi raids in armies dispatched by the Prophet.”
Bukhari:V5B57N74 “I heard Sa’d saying, ‘I was the first Arab to shoot an arrow in Allah’s Cause.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N401 “Allah’s Wrath became severe on anyone the Prophet killed in Allah’s Cause.”
Bukhari:V5B59N456 “Muhammad led the Fear Prayer [Allahu Akbar!] with one batch of his army while the other (batch) faced the enemy.”
Bukhari:V5B59N440 “Allah’s Apostle used to say, ‘None has the right to be worshipped except Allah Alone because He honored His Warriors and made His Messenger victorious. He defeated the clans; so there is nothing left.’”
Ishaq:287 “The Muslim raiders consulted one another concerning them. One of the Muslims said, ‘By Allah, if we leave these people alone, they will get into the sacred territory and will be safely out of our reach. If we kill them we will have killed in the sacred month.’”
Tabari VII:19 “They hesitated and were afraid to advance, but then they plucked up courage and agreed to kill as many as they could and to seize what they had with them. Waqid shot an arrow at Amr and killed him. Uthman and al-Hakam surrendered. Then Waqid and his companions took the caravan and the captives back to Allah’s Apostle in Medina. This was the first booty taken by the Companions of Muhammad.”
Ishaq:289 “Our lances drank of Amr’s blood and lit the flame of war.”
Tabari VII:20
Ishaq:287 “Abd Allah told his Companions, ‘A fifth of the booty we have taken belongs to the Apostle.’ This was before Allah made surrendering a fifth of the booty taken a requirement.”
Tabari VII:20
Ishaq:288 “The Quraysh said, ‘Muhammad and his Companions have violated the sacred month, shed blood, seized property, and taken men captive.’ The polytheists spread lying slander concerning him, saying, ‘Muhammad claims that he is following obedience to Allah, yet he is the first to violate the holy month and to kill our people.’”
Ishaq:288 “When the Qur’an:passage concerning this matter was revealed, and Allah relieved Muslims from their fear and anxiety, Muhammad took possession of the caravan and prisoners. The Quraysh sent him a ransom and the Prophet released the prisoners on payment. When the Qur’an:authorization came down to Muhammad, Abd Allah and his Companions were relieved and they became anxious for an additional reward. They said, ‘Will this raid be counted as part of the reward promised to Muslim combatants?’ So Allah sent down this Qur’an: ‘Those who believe and have fought in Allah’s Cause may receive Allah’s mercy.’ Allah made the booty permissible. He divided the loot, awarding four-fifths to the men He had allowed to take it. He gave one-fifth to His Apostle.”
Ishaq:288 “Allah divided the booty stolen from the first caravan after he made spoils permissible. He gave four-fifths to those He had allowed to take it and one-fifth to His Apostle.”
Tabari VII:29
Ishaq:289 “The Apostle heard that Abu Sufyan [a Meccan merchant] was coming from Syria with a large caravan containing their money and their merchandise. He was accompanied by only thirty men.”
Ishaq:289 “Muhammad summoned the Muslims and said, ‘This is the Quraysh caravan containing their property. Go out and attack it. Perhaps Allah will give it to us as prey.”
Tabari VII:29 “Abu Sufyan and the horsemen of the Quraysh were returning from Syria following the coastal road. When Allah’s Apostle heard about them he called his companions together and told them of the wealth they had with them and the fewness of their numbers. The Muslims set out with no other object than Sufyan and the men with him. They did not think that this raid would be anything other than easy booty.”
Bukhari:V5B59N702 “Allah did not admonish anyone who had not participated in the Ghazwa [raid] of Badr, for in fact, Allah’s Apostle had only gone out in search of the Quraysh caravan so that he could rob it. But Allah arranged for the Muslims and their enemy to meet by surprise. I was at the Aqaba pledge with Allah’s Apostle when we gave our lives in submission, but the Badr battle is more popular amongst the people. I was never stronger or wealthier than I was when I followed the Prophet on a Ghazwa.’”
Tabari VII:29 “They did not suppose that there would be a great battle. Concerning this Allah revealed a Qur’an: Qur’an:8:7 ‘Behold! Allah promised you that one of the two parties would be yours. You wished for the unarmed one, but Allah willed to justify His truth according to His words and to cut off the roots of the unbelievers [wipe them out to the last].’”
Tabari VII:29 “When Abu Sufyan heard that Muhammad’s Companions were on their way to intercept his caravan, he sent a message to the Quraysh. ‘Muhammad is going to attack our caravan, so protect your merchandise.’ When the Quraysh heard this, the people of Mecca hastened to defend their property and protect their men as they were told Muhammad was lying in wait for them.”
Ishaq:290 “Some Meccans got up to circumambulate the Ka’aba…. Sitting around the mosque, they wondered why they had allowed this evil rascal to attack their men.”
Ishaq:292 “Setting out in Ramadhan, Muhammad was preceded by two black flags. His companions had seventy camels.”
Tabari VII:38 “I have been informed by authorities that Muhammad set out on 3 Ramadhan at the head of 310 of his companions. The war banner of the Messenger was carried by Ali. The banner of the Ansar was carried by Sa’d.”
Ishaq:293
Tabari VII:30 “The prophet marched forward and spent the night near Badr with his Companions. While the Prophet was standing in prayer [asking Allah to help him steal] some Quraysh water-carriers came to the well. Among these was a black slave. Muhammad’s men seized him and brought him to the Messenger’s bivouac. They ordered him to salute Allah’s Apostle. Then they questioned him about Abu Sufyan. When the slave began to tell them about the protecting force, it was unwelcome news, for the only object of their raid was the caravan.”
Tabari VII:30 “Meanwhile the Prophet was praying, bowing and prostrating himself, and also seeing and hearing the treatment of the slave. They beat him severely and continued to interrogate him but they found that he had no knowledge of what they were looking for.”
Ishaq:294 “The Apostle was afraid the Ansar would not feel obliged to help him fight without the enemy being the aggressor and attacking in Medina. Sa’d said, ‘We hear and obey. We are experienced in war, trustworthy in combat. Allah will let us show you something that will bring you joy. The Apostle was delighted at Sa’d’s words which greatly encouraged him. Muhammad shouted, ‘It is as if I see the enemy lying prostrate.’”
Tabari VII:32 “When the Quraysh advanced, Muhammad threw dust in the direction of their faces, and Allah put them to flight…. The Meccan [merchant] force and the Prophet’s [pirates] met and Allah gave victory to His Messenger, shamed the unbelievers, and satisfied the Muslims’ thirst for revenge.”
Ishaq:297 “When the Apostle saw them he cried, ‘Allah, they called me a liar. Destroy them this morning.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N330
Ishaq:300 “Here is Gabriel holding the rein of a horse and leading the charge. He is equipped with his weapons and ready for the battle. There is dust upon his front teeth.”
Bukhari:V5B59N327 “Gabriel came to the Prophet and said, ‘How do you view the warriors of Badr?’ The Prophet said, ‘I see the fighters as the best Muslims.’ On that, Gabriel said, ‘And so are the Angels who are participating in the Badr battle.’”
Tabari VII:55 “Mihaja, the mawla [slave] of Umar [the future Caliph] was struck by an arrow and killed. He was the first Muslim to die.”
Tabari VII:55 “Allah’s Messenger went out to his men and incited them to fight. He promised, ‘Every man may keep all the booty he takes.’ Then Muhammad said, ‘By Allah, if any man fights today and is killed fighting aggressively, going forward and not retreating, Allah will cause him to enter Paradise.’ Umayr, who was holding some dates in his hand and eating them, said, ‘Fine, fine. This is excellent! Nothing stands between me and my entering Paradise except to be killed by these people!’ He threw down the dates, seized his sword, and fought until he was slain.”
Tabari VII:56 “‘Messenger of Allah, what makes the Lord laugh with joy at his servant?’ He replied, ‘When he plunges his hand into the midst of an enemy without armor.’ So Auf took off the coat of mail he was wearing and threw it away. Then he took his sword and fought the enemy until he was killed.”
Ishaq:301 “Muhammad picked up a handful of pebbles and faced the Quraysh. He shouted, ‘May their faces be deformed!’ He threw the pebbles at them and ordered his companions to attack. The foe was routed. Allah killed Quraysh chiefs and caused many of their nobles to be taken captive. While the Muslims were taking prisoners, the Messenger was in his hut.”
Bukhari:V5B59N290 “The Prophet said, ‘The believers who failed to join the Ghazwa of Badr and those who took part in it are not equal in reward.”
Bukhari:V5B59N333 “Az-Zubair said, ‘I attacked him with my spear and pierced his eye. I put my foot over his body to pull the weapon out, but even then I had to use great force. Later on Allah’s Apostle asked me for that spear and I gave it to him.’”
Ishaq:301 “As the Muslims were laying their hands on as many prisoners as they could catch, the Prophet, saw disapproval in the face of Sa’d. He said, ‘Why are you upset by the taking of captives?’ Sa’d replied, ‘This was the first defeat inflicted by Allah on the infidels. Slaughtering the prisoners would have been more pleasing to me than sparing them.’”
Tabari VII:59 “On the day of Badr I passed Umayyah as he was standing with his son Ali, holding his hand. I had with me some coats of mail which I had taken as plunder. Umayyah said, ‘Abd al-Ilah, would you like to take me as a prisoner? I will be more valuable to you as a captive to be ransomed than the coats of mail that you are carrying.’ I said, ‘Yes. Come here then.’ I flung away the armor and bound Umayyah and his son Ali, taking them with me. Muslims encircled us. Then they restrained us physically. One of the Muslims drew his sword and struck Ali in the leg, severing it so that he fell down. Umayyah gave a scream the like of which I have never heard. I said, ‘Save yourself, for there is no escape for your son. By Allah, I cannot save him from these men.’ Then the Muslims hacked Ali to pieces. Abd al-Rahman used to say, ‘May Allah have mercy on Bial [a slave turned Muslim marauder]! I lost my coats of mail, and he deprived me of my captives.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N297 “The Prophet faced the Ka’aba and invoked evil on the Quraysh people.”
Bukhari: V5B59N397 “Allah’s Apostle raised his head after bowing the first Rak’a of the morning prayer. He said, ‘O Allah! Curse so-and-so and so-and-so.’ After he had invoked evil upon them, Allah revealed: ‘Your Lord will send thousands of angels riding upon chargers sweeping down as a form of good tidings to reassure you that victory comes from Him. He will cut off parts of the unbelievers, overthrow them, and turn them back in frustration. For Allah is forgiving and kind.’”
Ishaq:303 “A cousin and I mounted a hill from which we could overlook Badr and see who would be defeated, so that we could join in the plundering afterwards. I was pursuing one of the Meccan polytheists in order to smite him, when his head suddenly fell off before my sword touched him. Then I knew that someone other than I had killed him.”
Tabari VII:61 “When the Prophet had finished with his enemy, he gave orders that Abu Jahl should be found among the dead. He said, ‘O Allah, do not let him escape!’ The first man who encountered Abu Jahl yelled out and I made him my mark. When he was within my reach, I attacked him and struck him a blow which severed his foot and half his leg. By Allah, when it flew off I could only compare it to a date-stone which flies out of a crusher when it is struck. Then his son hit me on the shoulder and cut off my arm. It dangled at my side from a piece of skin. The fighting prevented me from reaching him after that. I fought the whole day, dragging my arm behind me. When it began to hurt me, I put my foot on it and stood until I pulled it off.’”
Ishaq:304 “Abd Allah bin Mas’ud said, ‘I found Abu Jahl in the throws of death. I put my foot on his neck because he had grabbed me once at Mecca and had hurt me. Then I said, Has Allah disgraced you and put you to shame, O enemy of Allah?’ ‘In what way has he disgraced me?’ he asked. ‘Am I anything more important than a man whom you have killed?’”
Bukhari:V5B59N298 “Abu Jahl said, ‘You should not be proud that you have killed me.’”
Ishaq:304
Tabari VII:62 “I cut off Abu Jahl’s head and brought it to the Messenger. ‘O Allah’s Prophet, this is the head of the enemy of Allah.’ Muhammad said, ‘Praise be to Allah.’”
Ishaq:305 “Ukkasha fought until he broke his sword. He came to the Apostle who gave him a wooden cudgel telling him to fight with that. He brandished it and it became a brilliant weapon. Allah gave him victory while he wielded it. He took that weapon with him to every raid he fought with Allah’s Apostle until he was killed in the rebellion. These were his dying words: ‘What do you think about when you kill people? Are these not men just because they are not Muslims?’”
Ishaq:315 “It was so criminal, men could hardly imagine it. Muhammad was ennobled because of the bloody fighting. I swear we shall never lack soldiers, nor army leaders. Driving before us infidels until we subdue them with a halter above their noses and a branding iron. We will drive them to the ends of the earth. We will pursue them on horse and on foot. We will never deviate from fighting in our cause. We will bring upon the infidels the fate of the Ad and Jurhum. Any people that disobey Muhammad will pay for it. If you do not surrender to Islam, then you will live to regret it. You will be shamed in Hell, forced to wear a garment of molten pitch forever!”
Ishaq:310 “A Meccan said, ‘As soon as we were confronted by the raiding party, we turned our backs and they started killing and capturing us at their pleasure. Some of our men turned tail humiliated. Allah smote some of us with pustules from which we died.’”
Ishaq:311 “When the Quraysh began to bewail their dead, consumed in sorrow, one said, ‘Do not do this for Muhammad and his companions will rejoice over our misfortune.’”
Ishaq:340 “Surely Badr was one of the world’s great wonders. The roads to death are plain to see. Disobedience causes a people to perish. They became death’s pawns. We had sought their caravan, nothing else. But they came to us and there was no way out. So we thrust our shafts and swung our swords severing their heads. Our swords glittered as they killed. The banner of error was held by Satan. He betrayed the evil ones, those prone to treachery. He led them to death crying, ‘Fear Allah. He is invincible!’ On that day a thousand spirits were mustered on excited white stallions. Allah’s army fought with us. Under our banner, Gabriel attacked and killed them.”
Ishaq:341 “Allah favored His Apostle and humiliated the unbelievers. They were put to shame in captivity and death. The Apostle’s victory was glorious. Its message is plain for all to see. The Lord brought repeated calamities upon the pagans, bringing them under the Apostle’s power. Allah’s angry army smote them with their trusty swords. Many a lusty youngster left the enemy lying prone. Their women wept with burning throats for the dead were lying everywhere. But now they are all in Hell.”
Ishaq:342 “I wonder at foolish men like these who sing frivolously and vainly of the slain at Badr. This was nothing more than an impious and odious crime. Men fought against their brothers, fathers, and sons. Any with discernment and understanding recognize the wrong that was done here.”
Ishaq:344 “I wonder at Allah’s deed. None can defeat Him. Evil ever leads to death. We unsheathed our swords and testified to the unity of Allah, and we proved that His Apostle brought truth. We smote them and they scattered. The impious met death. They became fuel for Hell. All who aren’t Muslims must go there. It will consume them while the Stoker [Allah] increases the heat. They had called Allah’s Apostle a liar. They claimed, ‘You are nothing but a sorcerer.’ So Allah destroyed them.”
Ishaq:348 “They retreated in all directions. They rejected the Qur’an:and called Muhammad a liar. But Allah cursed them to make his religion and Apostle victorious. They lay still in death. Their throats were severed. Their foreheads embraced the dust. Their nostrils were defiled with filth. Many a noble, generous man we slew this day. We left them as meat for the hyenas. And later, they shall burn in the fires of Hell.”
Ishaq:349 “The battle will tell the world about us. Distant men will heed our warning. The infidels may cut off my leg, yet I am a Muslim. I will exchange my life for one with virgins fashioned like the most beautiful statues.”
Ishaq:357 “Their leaders were left prostrate. Their heads were sliced off like melons. Many an adversary have I left on the ground to rise in pain, broken and plucked. When the battle was joined I dealt them a vicious blow. Their arteries cried aloud, their blood flowed.”
Ishaq:308 “Muhammad halted on a sandhill and divided the booty Allah had given him. They congratulated him on the victory Allah had granted. But one of the warriors replied, ‘What are you congratulating us about? We only met some bald old women like the sacrificial camels who are hobbled, and we slaughtered them!’ The Apostle smiled because he knew that description fit .”
Tabari VII:81 “The next day I went to the Prophet. He was sitting with Abu Bakr, and they were weeping. I said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, tell me, what has made you weep? If I find cause to weep, I will weep with you, and if not, I will pretend to weep because you are weeping.’ The Prophet said, ‘It is because of the taking of ransoms. It was laid before me that I should punish them instead.’ Allah revealed: ‘It is not for any Prophet to have captives until he has made slaughter in the land.’ After that Allah made booty lawful for them.”
Tabari VII:98 “The Messenger ordered Zayd [the prophet’s former slave turned adoptive son] out on a raid in which he captured a Quraysh caravan led by Abu Sufyan at a watering place in Najd…. A number of their merchants set out with a large amount of silver since this was the main part of their merchandise. They hired a man to guide them along this route. Zayd captured the caravan and its goods but was unable to capture the men. He brought the caravan to the Prophet.”[If this isn’t piracy and terror the words need to be redefined.]”
Tabari VII:98 “The reason for this expedition was the Quraysh said, ‘Muhammad has damaged our trade, and sits astride our road. If we stay in Mecca we will consume our capital.’ …The news of the caravan reached the Prophet, as did the information that it contained much wealth and silver vessels. Zayd therefore intercepted it and made himself master of their caravan. The fifth (khums) was twenty thousand dirhams; Allah’s Apostle took it and divided the other four fifths among the members of the raiding party. Furat was taken captive. They said to him. ‘If you accept Islam the Messenger will not kill you.’”
Qur’an:3:150 “Soon We shall strike terror into the hearts of the Infidels, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority: their abode will be in the Fire!”
Ishaq:395 “Muslims, if you listen to the unbelievers you will retreat from the enemy and become losers. Ask Allah for victory and do not retreat, withdrawing from His religion. ‘We will terrorize those who disbelieve. In that way I will help you against them.’”
Qur’an:33:9 “O ye who believe! Remember the Grace of Allah, on you, when there came down an army. But We sent against them a hurricane and forces that ye saw not. Behold! They came on you from above you and from below you, and behold, the eyes became dim and the hearts gaped up to the throats, stupefied with terror, and ye imagined various vain thoughts about Allah!”
Ishaq:461 “Muhammad besieged them for twenty-five nights. When the siege became too severe for them, Allah terrorized them. Then they were told to submit.”
July 10th, 2007 at 9:54 am
Christians:
Qur’an 5:17 “Verily they are disbelievers and infidels who say, ‘The Messiah, son of Mary, is God.’”
Qur’an 5:51 “Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends. They are but friends and protectors to each other.”
Qur’an 5:72 “They are surely infidels who blaspheme and say: ‘God is Christ, the Messiah, the son of Mary.’ But the Messiah only said: ‘O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.’”
Qur’an 74:31 “We have appointed nineteen angels to be the wardens of the Hell Fire. We made a stumbling-block for those who disbelieve and We have fixed their number as a trial for unbelievers in order that the People of the Book may arrive with certainty, and that no doubts may be left for the People of the Book, those in whose hearts is a disease.”
Ishaq:180 “According to my information, the Apostle often sat by a young Christian slave named Jabr. The Meccans said, ‘He is the one who teaches Muhammad most of what he brings.’ Then Allah revealed, Qur’an 16:103 ‘We know what they (pagans) say: “It is only a mortal man who teaches him (Muhammad). But the tongue of the man they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this (Qur’an) is pure Arabic.’”
Qur’an 72:15 “But the Qasitun (disbelievers) are the firewood of hell.”
Qur’an 88:1 “Has the narration reached you of the overwhelming (calamity)? Some faces (Jews and Christians) that Day, will be humiliated, downcast, scorched by the burning fire, while they are made to drink from a boiling hot spring.”
Qur’an 9:29 “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or the Last Day, who do not forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, or acknowledge the Religion of Truth (Islam), (even if they are) People of the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizyah tribute tax in submission, feeling themselves subdued and brought low.” [Another translation says:] “pay the tax in acknowledgment of our superiority and their state of subjection.”
Ishaq:552 “The Quraysh had put pictures in the Ka’aba including two of Jesus and one of Mary. Muhammad ordered that the pictures should be erased.”
Qur’an 5:14 “From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We made a covenant, but they forgot and abandoned a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, stirred up enmity and hatred among them to the Day of Doom. Soon will Allah show them the handiwork they have done.”
Qur’an 5:15 “O People of the Book! There has come to you Our Apostle, revealing to you much that you used to hide in your Scripture, suppressing and passing over much. There has come to you from Allah a (new) light (Muhammad) and a clear Book [the Qur’an].”
Qur’an 5:17 “…Say (Muhammad): ‘Who then has the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ, the Messiah, the son of Mary, his mother, and everyone else on earth?”
Qur’an 5:18 “The Jews and the Christians say: ‘We are sons of Allah, and his beloved.’ Say: ‘Why then does He punish you for your sins? Nay, you are but men. He forgives whom He wishes and punishes whom He pleases.’”
Qur’an 5:35 “Believers, fear Allah and seek the way to approach Him, striving hard, fighting Jihad with all your might in His Cause that you may be successful. As for the disbelievers [previously defined as Christians], if they had everything on earth, two times over, to give as ransom for the penalty of the Day of Doom, it would never be accepted from them. Theirs will be a painful torment. They will desire to get out of the fire, but they shall not be released from it. They shall have an everlasting torture.”
Qur’an 5:47 “Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed therein. If any fail to judge by what Allah has revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.”
Qur’an 5:48 “To you [Christians] We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah has revealed.”
Qur’an 5:49 “And this (He commands): Judge between them by what Allah has revealed and follow not their [Christian] desires, but beware of them lest they beguile you, seducing you away from any of that which Allah hath sent down to you. And if they turn you away [from being Muslims], be assured that for their crime it is Allah’s purpose to smite them. Truly most men are rebellious.”
Qur’an 5:57 “Believers, take not for friends those who take your religion for a mockery or sport, a joke, whether among those who received the Scripture before you or among those who reject Faith; but fear Allah.”
Qur’an 5:68 “Say: ‘People of the Scripture Book! You have no ground to stand upon unless you observe the Taurat [Torah], the Injeel [Gospel], and all the Revelation that has come to you from your Lord.’ It is certain to increase their rebellion and blasphemy. But grieve you not over unbelieving people.”
Qur’an 5:72 “…Lo! Whoever joins other gods with Allah or says He has a partner, Allah has forbidden Paradise, and the Hell Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.”
Qur’an 5:73 “They are surely disbelievers who blaspheme and say: ‘God is one of three in the Trinity for there is no Ilah (God) except One, Allah. If they desist not from saying this (blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall them - the disbelievers will suffer a painful doom.”
Qur’an 5:75 “The Messiah, Christ, the son of Mary, was no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had to eat their food. See how Allah does make His signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded!”
Qur’an 4:157 “‘We [Jews] killed the Messiah, Jesus,’ but they killed him not, nor crucified him. It appeared so to them (as the resemblance of Jesus was put over another man and they killed that man). Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself. Those who differ with this version are full of doubts. They have no knowledge and follow nothing but conjecture. For surely they killed him not.”
Qur’an 4:171 “O People of the Book! Do not exaggerate in your religion; nor speak lies of Allah. The Messiah, Christ Jesus, the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a Spirit proceeding from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not ‘Trinity.’ Cease and Desist: (it is) better for you: for Allah is one Ilah (God). (Far it is removed from him of) having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs. The Messiah is proud to be a slave of Allah, as are the angels, those nearest. Those who disdain His worship and are arrogant. He will gather them all together unto Himself to (answer)…. He will punish with a painful doom; Nor will they find, besides Allah, any to protect or save them.”
Qur’an 4:159 “And there is none of the People of the Book but will believe in him (Jesus as only a messenger of Allah and a human being) before his (Jesus’) death. He will be a witness against them.”
Qur’an 5:77 “Say (Muhammad): ‘People of the Book, do not overstep the bounds in your religion, or follow the people who erred and led many astray. Cursed are the unbelievers among the Children of Israel by David and Jesus…. They do vile things, allying themselves with the infidels so that Allah’s indignation is upon them and in torment they will suffer for all eternity.” [Another translation reads:] “Curses were pronounced on the unbelievers, the Children of Israel who rejected Islam, by the tongues of David and of Jesus because they disobeyed and rebelled.”
Qur’an 5:80 “You see many of them allying themselves with the unbelieving infidels. Vile indeed are their souls. Allah’s wrath is on them, and in torment will they abide.”
Qur’an 5:81 “If only they had believed in Allah, in the Prophet, and in what had been revealed to him.”
Qur’an 5:82 “You will find the Jews and disbelievers [defined as Christians in 5:73] the most vehement in hatred for the Muslims.”
Qur’an 5:110 “And God will say: ‘O Jesus! Recount My favor to you and to your mother. Behold! I strengthened you with the Holy Spirit so that you spoke to the people in the cradle and in the prime of life. Behold! I taught you the law and the judgment, the Torah and the Gospel. And behold, you made out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird and you breathed into it and it became a bird by My permission. And you healed those born blind by My permission and the lepers by My permission. And behold! You raised forth the dead by My permission. And behold! I did restrain the Jews from harming you when you came with clear proofs. And the unbelievers among the Jews said: ‘This is nothing but magic.’”
Qur’an 5:111 “Behold! I inspired the [Christian] disciples to have faith in Me and My Messenger. They said, ‘We are believers, and bear witness that we prostrate ourselves to Allah as Muslims.’”
Qur’an 5:112 “Behold! The disciples, said: ‘O Jesus, can your Lord send down to us a table well laid out from heaven?’ Said Jesus: ‘Fear Allah, if you have faith.’ When the disciples said: ‘O Jesus, son of Mary, is your Lord able to send down for us a table spread with food from heaven?’ He said: “Observe your duty to Allah, if you are true believers.’” Qur’an 5:113 “They said: ‘We only wish to eat thereof to satisfy our hearts, and to know that you have told us the truth. We want to witnesses a miracle.’ Said Jesus, the son of Mary: ‘O Allah our Lord! Send us from heaven a table well laid out, that there may be for us a feast, a Sign from you.” Qur’an 5:115 “Allah said: ‘I am going to send it down unto you, but if any of you after that disbelieves, resisting Faith [Islam], I will punish him with a torment such as I have not inflicted on any one of my creatures, man or jinn. I will punish them with a torment such as I have not inflicted on any one of my creatures.”
Qur’an 5:116 “And behold! Allah will say: ‘O Jesus, the son of Mary! Did you say unto men, worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?’ He will say: ‘Glory to You! Never could I utter what I had no right.”
Qur’an 5:117 “I only said what You (Allah) commanded me to say: Worship Allah, my lord and your Lord. I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them but you took me up. (This is a great admonition and warning to the Christians of the whole world.)”
Tabari IX:15 “One of the Ansari who was plundering the slain came upon a Thaqif boy. He discovered that he was an uncircumcised Christian. He uncovered others and then yelled out at the top of his voice, ‘Allah knows that the Thaqif are uncircumcised.”
Tabari IX:86 “Don’t seduce the Jews or Christians for incumbent on them is to pay the jizyah protection tax.”
Bukhari:V2B23N414 “The Prophet in his fatal illness said, “Allah cursed Jews and Christians because they took their Prophets’ graves as places for praying.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N727 “When Allah’s Apostle became seriously sick, he started covering his face with a woolen sheet. When he felt short of breath, he removed it, and said, ‘That is so! Allah’s curse be on Jews and Christians.’”
Bukhari:V4B55N607 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘On the night of my Ascension to Heaven, I saw Jesus with a red face as if he had just come out of a bathroom. And I resemble Abraham more than any of his offspring.’”
Qur’an 2:111 “They say: ‘None shall enter Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian.’ Those are their (vain) desires. Say: ‘Produce your proof if you are truthful.’ Nay, whoever submits His face to Allah and surrenders, he will get his reward; on such shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. The Jews say: ‘The Christians follow nothing; and the Christians say: ‘the Jews follow nothing (true);’ Yet they (profess to) recite the (same) Scripture Book. But Allah will judge between them in their quarrel.”
Qur’an 9:30 “The Jews call Uzair the son of Allah, and the Christians say that the Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying from their mouths; they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s (Himself) fights against them, cursing them, damning and destroying them. How perverse are they!”
Qur’an 9:31 “They (Jews and Christians) consider their rabbis and monks to be gods besides Allah. They also took their Lord Messiah to be a god but they were commanded (in the Taurat and Injeel) to worship only One Ilah (God). There is no ilah (god) but He. Too holy is He for the partners they associate (with Him).”
Qur’an 9:34 “Believers, there are many (Christian) monks and (Jewish) rabbis who in falsehood devour the wealth of mankind and hinder (men) from the way of Allah. And there are those who bury gold and silver and spend it not in Allah’s Cause. (Muhammad) announce unto them tidings of a painful torture. On the Day [of Doom] heat will be produced out of that (wealth) in the Fire of Hell. It will be branded on their foreheads, their flanks, and their backs. ‘This is the (treasure) which you hoarded for yourselves: now taste it!’”
Qur’an 2:116 “They say: ‘Allah hath begotten a son: glory be to Him.’ Nay, to Him belongs all that is in heavens and on earth: All are subservient and obedient to Him.”
Qur’an 2:145 “Even if you were to bring to the people of the Scripture Book all the Signs, they would not follow Your Qiblah; nor are you going to follow their Qiblah; nor indeed will they follow each other’s Qiblah.”
Qur’an 2:146 “The People of the Book, unto whom We gave the Scripture, know/recognize this revelation/him as they know/recognize their own sons; But lo! a party of them knowingly conceals truth.”
Qur’an 2:71 “The semblance of the infidels is one who shouts to one who cannot hear. They are deaf, dumb, and blind. They make no sense.”
Qur’an 2:174 “Those who conceal Allah’s revelations in the [Bible] Scripture Book, and thus make a miserable profit thereby [selling it to Muhammad], swallow Fire into themselves; Allah will not address them. Grievous will be their doom.”
Qur’an 2:175 “They are the ones who bartered away guidance for error and Torment in place of Forgiveness. Ah, what boldness (they show) for the Fire! (Their doom is) because Allah sent down the Book in truth but those who seek causes of dispute in the Book are in a schism of great opposition.”
Tabari VIII:98 “Between the truce of Hudaybiyah and his death, the Messenger dispersed his Companions with letters. ‘I have been sent as a mercy and for all. Therefore, convey the message from me, and Allah shall have mercy on you. Do not become disobedient to me as the Disciples became disobedient to Jesus. He called them to the like of what I called you to. Those whom he sent close by were pleased and accepted; those whom he sent far off were refused. Jesus complained of their behavior to Allah, and when they awoke the next morning, each could speak the language of the people to whom he had been sent. Then Jesus said, ‘This is an affair that Allah has determined for you; so go forth!’”
Qur’an 8:50 “If you could have seen the infidels when the angels drew away their souls, striking their faces and smiting their backs. The angels said: ‘Taste the penalty of the blazing Fire.’”
Qur’an 8:52 “They brought this on themselves. Their case is like that of Pharaoh and of those before them. They denied and rejected the revelations of Allah, and Allah destroyed them, punishing them for their crimes: for Allah is strict, severe in punishment.”
Qur’an 61:6 “And Jesus, the son of Mary, said: ‘Children of Israel, I am the Messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming that (which was revealed) before me in the Torah, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad, the Praised One.’ But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, ‘this is sorcery!’”
Qur’an 61:14 “O Muslims! Be helpers of Allah: As Jesus the son of Mary said to the Disciples, ‘Who will be my helpers (in the Cause) of Allah?’ Said the disciples, ‘We are Allah’s helpers!’ Then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: But We gave power to those who believed against their enemies, and they became the victorious.”
Qur’an 3:37 “Mariam was given into the care of Zacharyah. Whenever he came to see her in her chamber he found her provided with food, and he asked, ‘Where has this come from Mary?’ She said, ‘From Allah who gives in abundance to whomsoever He will. Zacharyah prayed, ‘Bestow on me offspring that is good [i.e., not a girl]. As he stood in the chamber the angels said, ‘Allah sends you tidings of Yahya (John) who will confirm a thing from Allah (the creation of Isa (Jesus), the Word of Allah) and be a noble prophet, one who is upright and does good [a Muslim].”
Qur’an 3:42Qur’an 3:44 “Behold! the angels said: ‘Mariam! Allah has chosen you and purified you above the women of all nations and creation (including jinn). Mary! submit with obedience to your Lord (Allah). Prostrate yourself, and bow down with those [Muslims] who bow down.” “This is part of the tidings of the things unseen, which you have no knowledge and We reveal unto you (Messenger!) by inspiration. You were not with them when they cast lots with arrows, as to which of them should be charged with the care of Mariam. Nor were you with them when they disputed.”
Qur’an 3:45 “Behold, the angels said: ‘O Mariam! Allah gives you glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be the Messiah, Isa (Jesus), the son of Mariam, held in honor in this world and the Hereafter and of those nearest to Allah.”
Qur’an 4.171 “O people of the Book (Christians), do not be fanatical in your faith, and say nothing but the truth about Allah. The Messiah who is Isa (Jesus), son of Mariam, was only a messenger of Allah, nothing more. He bestowed His Word on Mariam and His Spirit. So believe in Allah and say not Trinity for Allah is one Ilah (God)…far be it from His Glory to beget a son.”
Qur’an 3:46 “And he shall speak to the people when in the cradle and when of old age, and shall be one of the good ones.”
Bukhari:V4B55N645 “The Prophet said, ‘None spoke in cradle but three: The first was Jesus, the second was an Israeli called Juraij. While he was offering his prayers, his mother called him. He said, “Shall I answer her or keep on praying?” He went on praying and did not answer her. His mother said, “O Allah! Do not let him die till he sees the faces of prostitutes.”
Qur’an 3:47 “Mary said: ‘O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man has touched me?’ He said: ‘Even so: Allah creates what He wills: When He has decreed a plan, He but says to it, ‘Be,’ and it is!”
Qur’an 3:48 “And Allah will teach him the Scripture Book and Wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel, and appoint him a messenger to the Children of Israel, with this message: ‘Lo! I come unto you with a Sign from your Lord. Lo! I fashion for you out of clay the likeness of a bird, and I breathe into it and it is a bird, by Allah’s leave. I heal him who was born blind, and the leper, and I raise the dead, by Allah’s leave.” [As if reading a different Arabic text, the Ali translation says:] “He will teach him the Law and the Judgment, the Torah and the Gospel, and he will be Apostle to the children of Israel, (saying) ‘I have come to you with a prodigy from your Lord that I will fashion the state of destiny out of the mire for you and breathe (a new spirit) into it, and (you) will rise by the will of Allah.”
Bukhari:V4B55N657 “Allah’s Messenger said, ‘Isa (Jesus), the son of Mariam, will shortly descend amongst you Muslims and will judge mankind by the law of the Qur’an. He will break the cross and kill the swine [Jews] and there will be no Jizyah tax taken from non-Muslims. Money will be so abundant no one will accept it. So you may recite this Holy Verse: “Isa (Jesus) was just a human being before his death. On the Day of Resurrection he (Jesus) will be a witness against the Christians.”‘”
Bukhari:V4B55N658 “Allah’s Apostle said ‘How will you be when the son of Mary (i.e. Jesus) descends amongst you and he will judge people by the Law of the Qur’an and not by the law of Gospel.’”
Bukhari:V4B55N651-2 “I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, ‘I am the nearest of all the people to Jesus. There has been no prophet between me and Jesus. All the prophets are paternal brothers; their mothers are different, but their religion is one.’”
Qur’an 3:50 “(I [Isa/Jesus] have come) to attest the Torah which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was forbidden; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me. Lo! Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. That is a straight path.”
Bukhari:V4B56N814 “There was a Christian who embraced Islam and he used to write the revelations for the Prophet. Later on he returned to Christianity again he used to say: ‘Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him.’”
Qur’an 3:52 “But when Jesus became conscious of their disbelief, he cried: ‘Who will be my helpers in the Allah’s Cause? The disciples said: We will be Allah’s helpers. We believe in Allah, and do you bear witness that we are Muslims.”
Qur’an 3:54 “And they (the disciples from the previous verse) schemed, and Allah schemed and plotted (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers.”
Qur’an 3:54 [Another translation reads:] “‘Lord, we believe in Your revelations [the Torah and Gospels] and follow this Apostle [Jesus]. Enroll us among the witnesses.’ But the Christians contrived a plot and Allah did the same; but Allah’s plot was the best.” [A third translation says that “they” refers to “disbelievers,” not the disciples and they plotted to kill Jesus.] “And they (disbelievers) plotted (to kill Isa [Jesus]) and Allah plotted too.”
Qur’an 3:55 “Allah said, ‘Jesus, I will take you and raise you to Myself and rid you of the infidels (who have forged the lie that you are My son)…. Those who are infidels will surely receive severe torment both in this world and the next; and none will they have as a savior for them.” [Interesting, considering…] Qur’an 5:72 “They are surely infidels who say; ‘God is the Christ, the Messiah, the son of Mary.” Qur’an 3:55 [Another translation reads:] “Behold! Allah said: ‘O Jesus! I will take you and raise you to Myself and clear you (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow you superior to those who reject faith. Then shall you all return unto me, and I will judge between you on the matters wherein you dispute.” [Another:] “(Remember) when Allah said: ‘Jesus! Lo! I am gathering you and causing you to ascend unto Me. I am cleansing you of those who disbelieve.” [A fourth reads:] “When Allah said: ‘Jesus, I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth) and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve…. I will decide between you concerning that which you differed.”
Qur’an 3:56 “As for those disbelieving infidels, I will punish them with a terrible agony in this world and the next. They have no one to help or save them.” Qur’an 3:58 “This is what We rehearse to you of the Signs and Message, a wise reminder. The similitude (likeness) of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: ‘Be.’ And he was.”
Qur’an 3:60 “The Truth (comes) from Allah alone. So be not of those who doubt, waver or dispute. If any one disputes in this matter with you, now after knowledge has come to you, say: ‘Come! Let us gather together our sons and women among ourselves. Then let us earnestly pray, and invoke the curse of Allah on those who lie!’”
Qur’an 3:61 “If anyone disputes with you about Jesus being divine, flee them and pray that Allah will curse them.” Qur’an 3:62 “This is the true account, the true explanation: There is no Ilah (God) except Allah; and Allah - He is the Mighty, the Wise. And if they turn away, then lo! Allah is aware of the corrupters, the mischief-makers. Say: ‘O People of the Book, come to common terms as an agreement between us and you: That we all shall worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; and that none of us shall take others for lords beside Allah.’ If then they turn back, say you: ‘Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims surrendered.”
Qur’an 3:67 “Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian; but he was a true Muslim, surrendered to Allah (which is Islam), and he joined not gods with Allah.” Qur’an 3:69 “It is the wish of the followers of the People of the Book to lead you astray. But they make none to go astray except themselves, but they perceive not. You People of the Book! Why reject you the signs, proofs, and verses of Allah, of which you are witnesses? You People of the Book! Why do you clothe Truth with falsehood, and conceal the Truth?”
Qur’an 3:118 “O you who believe! Take not into your intimacy those outside your religion (pagans, Jews, and Christians). They will not fail to corrupt you. They only desire your ruin. Rank hatred has already appeared from their mouths. What their hearts conceal is far worse. When they are alone, they bite off the very tips of their fingers at you in their rage. Say unto them: ‘Perish in your rage.’”
Qur’an 4:48 “Allah forgives not that partners [Christ as God] should be set up with Him; but He forgives anything else, to whom He please; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin most heinous.”
Qur’an 4:50 “Behold! how they invent lies against Allah! That is flagrant sin.”
Qur’an 4:51 “Have you not seen those to whom a portion of the Book has been given? They believe in sorcery and false deities and say of those who disbelieve: these are better guided than those who believe. They are (men) whom Allah has cursed: And those whom Allah has cursed, you will find that they have no savior.”
Qur’an 4:54 “Are they jealous and envious what Allah has given them of his bounty? But We had already given the house of Abraham the Book, and conferred upon them a grand kingdom. Some of them believed, and some of them averted their faces from him. And Hell is sufficient for their burning. Those who reject our Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire. As often as their skin is burnt and singed, roasted through, We shall change it for fresh skin, so that they may go on tasting the torment.”
July 10th, 2007 at 9:55 am
Jews:
Qur’an 2:61 “Humiliation and wretchedness were stamped on the Jews and they were visited with Allah’s wrath.”
Qur’an 4:44 “Have you not considered those to whom a portion of the Book has been given? They traffic in error and desire that you should go astray. But Allah has full knowledge of your enemies. Of the Jews there are those who displace words from their (right) places, saying, ‘We hear and we disobey’ with a twist of their tongues they slander Faith…. Allah has cursed them for disbelief.”
Qur’an 4:47 “O you People of the Book to whom the Scripture has been given, believe in what We have (now) revealed, confirming and verifying what was possessed by you, before We destroy your faces beyond all recognition, turning you on your backs, and curse you as We cursed the Sabbath-breakers, for the decision of Allah Must be executed.”
Qur’an 4:160 “For the iniquity of the Jews We made unlawful for them certain (foods) in that they hindered many from Allah’s Way, that they took usury, though they were forbidden, and that they devoured men’s wealth on false pretenses, We have prepared for those among them who reject [Islamic] Faith a painful doom.”
Qur’an 5:59 “Say: ‘People of the Book! Do you disapprove of us for no other reason than that we believe in Allah, and the revelation that has come to us and that which came before?’ Say: ‘Shall I point out to you something much worse than this by the treatment it received from Allah? Those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath, those of whom He transformed into apes and swine.”
Qur’an 2:64 “But you [Jews] went back on your word and were lost losers. So become apes, despised and hated. We made an example out of you.”
Ishaq:240 “The Jews are a nation of liars…. The Jews are a treacherous, lying, and evil people.”
Qur’an 33:26 “Allah made the Jews leave their homes by terrorizing them so that you killed some and made many captive. And He made you inherit their lands, their homes, and their wealth. He gave you a country you had not traversed before.”
Ishaq:250 “The bestial transformation occurred when Allah turned Jews into apes, despised.”
Qur’an 59:14 “The Jews are devoid of sense. There is a grievous punishment awaiting them. Satan tells them not to believe so they will end up in Hell.”
Ishaq:254
Qur’an 2:96 “We will not remove a Jew from the punishment. They know the shameful thing that awaits them.”
Qur’an 4:55 “Sufficient for the Jew is the Flaming Fire!”
Qur’an 88:1 “Has the narration reached you of the overwhelming (calamity)? Some faces (all disbelievers, Jews and Christians) that Day, will be humiliated, downcast, scorched by the burning fire, while they are made to drink from a boiling hot spring.”
Tabari VIII:116 “After his return from Hudaybiyah, Allah’s Messenger marched against Khaybar. He halted with his army in a valley between the people of Khaybar and the Ghatafan tribe to prevent the latter from assisting the Jews.”
Ishaq:264 “A notable Jew spoke to the Apostle, twisting his tongue. He attacked Islam and reviled it, so Allah sent down, ‘Allah knows best about your enemies. Some of the Jews change words from their contexts and say: “We hear and disobey,” twisting their tongues and attacking the religion so Allah cursed them.’”
Tabari VIII:121 “Ali struck the Jew with a swift blow that split his helmet, neck protector, and head, landing in his rear teeth. And the Muslims entered the city. Muhammad conquered the [Jewish] neighborhood. Safiyah was brought to him, and another woman with her. Bilal led them past some of the Jews we had slain including the woman’s dead husband. When she saw them, the woman with Safiyah cried out, slapped her face, and poured dust on her head. When Allah’s Prophet saw her, he said, ‘Take this she-devil away from me!’”
Bukhari:V4B53N380 “Umar expelled all the Jews and Christians from Arabia. Allah’s Apostle after conquering Khaybar thought of expelling the Jews from the land which, after he conquered it, belonged to Allah, Allah’s Apostle and the Muslims. But the Jews requested Allah’s Apostle to leave them there on the condition that they would do the labor and get half of the fruits (the land would yield). Allah’s Apostle said, ‘We shall keep you on these terms as long as we wish.’ Thus they stayed till the time of Umar’s Caliphate when he expelled them.”
Tabari VIII:130 “The Messenger said during his final illness, ‘Two religions cannot coexist in the Arabian Peninsula.’ Umar investigated the matter, then sent to the Jews, saying: ‘Allah has given permission for you to be expelled; for I have received word that the Prophet said that two religions cannot coexist in Arabia.”
Ishaq:517 “Khaybar was stormed by the Apostle’s squadron, fully armed, powerful, and strong. It brought certain humiliation with Muslim men in its midst. We attacked and they met their doom. Muhammad conquered the Jews in fighting that day as they opened their eyes to our dust.”
Ishaq:524 “We cannot accept the oaths of Jews. Their infidelity is so great they swear falsely.”
Qur’an 59:14 “They [Jews] will not fight against you save in fortified townships. Their hostility and hatred amongst themselves is strong: you would think they were united, but their hearts they are divided. That is because these [Jews] are a people devoid of sense.”
Ishaq:245 “Do you love Jews and their religion, you liver-hearted ass, and not Muhammad? Their religion will never march with ours…. Jews make false professions about Islam. So Allah sent down: ‘Satan wishes to lead them astray.”
Ishaq:248 “Allah increases their sickness. A tormented doom awaits the Jews. Allah said, ‘They are mischief makers. They are fools. The Jews deny the truth and contradict what the Apostle has brought. I will mock them and let them continue to wander blindly.’”
Tabari VII:158 “The Messenger of Allah besieged the Nadir Jews for fifteen days. In the end they made peace with him on the condition that the Prophet would not shed their blood and that their property and possessions would be his.”
Qur’an 5:13 “But because of their breach of their covenant We cursed the Jews, and made their hearts grow hard. They change the words from their (right) places [the illiterate prophet pronounced] and forget and abandon a good part of the message that was sent them. Nor will you cease to find deceit in them. And because of their breaking their covenant We have cursed them. They altered words from their context and they neglected a portion of the message they were reminded of.”
Qur’an 5:41 “Or it be among the Jews, men who will listen to any lie. They change the context of the words from their (right) times and places…. For them there is disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter a heavy punishment.”"
Qur’an 5:42 “They are fond of listening to falsehood, of devouring anything forbidden; they are greedy for illicit gain!”
Qur’an 5:44 “It was We who revealed the Torah. By its standard the prophets judged the Jews, and the prophets bowed (in Islam) to Allah’s will, surrendering. For the rabbis and priests: to them was entrusted the protection of Allah’s Scripture Book; they were witnesses of it. Therefore fear not men, but fear Me, and sell not My revelations for a miserable price.”
Qur’an 5:64 “The Jews say: ‘Allah’s hands are fettered.’ Be their hands tied up and be they accursed for the blasphemy they utter. Nay, both His hands are widely outstretched, giving [Muslims Jewish booty] as He pleases. Amongst them we have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Doom. Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah does extinguish it. But they strive to do mischief on earth.”
Qur’an 98:1 “Those among the People of the Book, who disbelieve and are idolaters, would never have been freed from their false religion if the Clear Proofs had not come to them. An Apostle of Allah came reading out of hallowed pages…. They were commanded to serve Allah exclusively, fulfilling their devotional obligations, and paying the zakat. Surely the unbelievers and idolaters from the People of the Book will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.”
Qur’an 5:78 “Curses were pronounced on the unbelievers, the Children of Israel who rejected Islam, by the tongues of David and of Jesus because they disobeyed and rebelled.”
Qur’an 5:80 “You see many of them allying themselves with the unbelieving infidels. Vile indeed are their souls. Allah’s wrath is on them, and in torment will they abide.”
Qur’an 5:81 “If only they had believed in Allah, in the Prophet, and in what had been revealed to him.”
Qur’an 5:82 “You will find the Jews and disbelievers [defined as Christians in 5:73] the most vehement in hatred for the Muslims.”
Ishaq:262 “Some Muslims remained friends with the Jews, so Allah sent down a Qur’an forbidding them to take Jews as friends. From their mouths hatred has already shown itself and what they conceal is worse.”
Qur’an 2:59 “We sent a plague upon the Jews from heaven, for their evil-doing.”
Bukhari:V4B56N679 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Plague is a means of torture sent on the Israelis.’”
Bukhari:V2B23N457 “The Prophet went out after sunset and heard a dreadful voice. He said, ‘The Jews are being punished in their graves.’”
Qur’an 17:7 “We shall rouse Our (Muslim) slaves to shame and ravage you (Jews), disfiguring your faces. They will enter the Temple as before and destroy, laying to waste all that they conquer.”
Bukhari:V1B4N147 “People say, ‘Whenever you sit for answering the call of nature, you should not face the Qiblah of Jerusalem.’ I told them. ‘Once I went up the roof of our house and I saw Allah’s Apostle answering the call of nature while sitting on two bricks facing Jerusalem.”
Ishaq:239 “About this time Jewish rabbis showed hostility to the Apostle in envy, hatred, and malice, because Allah had chosen His Apostle from the Arabs. The Jews considered the Prophet a liar and strove against Islam.”
Ishaq:239 “Jewish rabbis used to annoy the Apostle with questions, introducing confusion.” “Qur’ans used to come down in reference to their questions.”
Ishaq:240 “Labid bewitched Allah’s Apostle so that he could not come at his wives. These Jewish rabbis opposed the apostle, they asked questions and stirred up trouble against Islam trying to extinguish it.”
Ishaq:240 “I concealed the matter from the Jews and then went to the Apostle and said, ‘The Jews are a nation of liars and I want you to give me a house and hide me from them. If they learn I’ve become a Muslim, they’ll utter slanderous lies against me.’ So the prophet gave me a house, and when the Jews came, I emerged and said, ‘O Jews, fear Allah and accept what He has sent you. For you know that he is the Apostle of Allah. You will find him described in your Torah and even named.’ They accused me of lying and reviled me. I told Muhammad, ‘The Jews are a treacherous, lying, and evil people.’”
Ishaq:241 “Mukhayriq was a learned rabbi owning much property in date palms. He recognized the Apostle by his description and felt a predilection for his religion. He violated the Sabbath to fight on behalf of Islam and was killed in battle. I am told the Prophet used to say, ‘Mukhayriq is the best of the Jews [a dead one].’ The Apostle took his property.”
Ishaq:242 “Julas the Jew used to say, ‘If Muhammad is right we are worse than donkeys.’ Allah sent down concerning him: ‘They swear that they did not say it, when they did say the words of unbelief…. Allah will afflict them with a painful punishment in this world and in the next.’ [Surah 9:75] Ishaq:242 “The Apostle ordered Umar to kill him, but he escaped to Mecca.”
Ishaq:246 “The surah of the Hypocrites came down because some men sent secret messages to the Nadir Jews when the Apostle besieged them…. Allah bears witness that they are liars. Like Satan when he says to men, “Disbelieve.”‘ [59:11]
Qur’an 59:14 “They are a divided people devoid of sense. There is a grievous punishment awaiting them. Satan tells them not to believe so both of them will end up in Hell.”
Qur’an 59:2 “It was He [Allah] who drove the [Jewish] People of the Book from their [Medina] homes and into exile. They refused to believe. You did not think that they would go away. And they imagined that their settlement would protect them against Allah. But Allah’s [actually Muhammad’s] (torment) came at them from where they did not suspect and terrorized them. Their homes were destroyed. So learn a lesson O men who have eyes. This is My warning. Had Allah not decreed the expulsion of the Jews, banishing them into the desert, He would certainly have punished them in this world, and in the next they shall taste the torment of Hell Fire.”
Ishaq:251 “Moses commanded them to prostrate themselves and his Lord spoke to him and they heard His voice giving them commands and prohibitions so that they understood what they heard. But when Moses went back to the Jews a party of them changed the Commandments they had been given.” [2:75]
Ishaq:252 “Have you no understanding? Why do you maintain that he is not a prophet since you know that Allah has made a Covenant with you that you should follow him? While he tells you that he is the prophet whom you are expecting, and that you will find him in Our book, you oppose him and do not recognize him. You reject his prophethood on mere opinion.”
Ishaq:253 “Allah cursed them for their unbelief. When a scripture comes to them from Allah confirming what they already have, they deny it. Allah’s curse is on them.”
Ishaq:254 “In the pagan era the Jews were scripture folk and we were pagans. They used to say, ‘Soon a prophet will be sent whom we shall follow.’ When Allah sent his Apostle from the Quraysh and we followed him they denied him. Allah revealed, ‘When there comes to him one they recognize, they deny him. They are wretched, so Allah cursed them, and He will give them a shameful punishment.’ The double anger is His wrath because they have disregarded the Torah and anger because they disbelieved in this Prophet whom Allah has sent to them.” [2:89]
Ishaq:254 “Long for death [Jews], if you are truthful. Pray that God will kill whichever one of us is the most false. The Jews refused the Prophet’s dare.” “Allah said to His Prophet, ‘They will never accept your dare because of their past deeds. But they recognize you from the knowledge they have. Yet they deny. Had they accepted your dare, not a single Jew would have remained alive on the earth.” [2:94]
Ishaq:254 “We will not remove a Jew from the punishment. The Jew knows the shameful thing that awaits him in the next life because he has wasted the knowledge he has.” [2:96]
Ishaq:255 “Jewish rabbis came to the Apostle and asked him to answer four questions saying, ‘If you do so we will follow you, testify to your truth, and believe in you.’ They began, ‘Why does a boy resemble his mother when the semen comes from the father?’ Muhammad replied, ‘Do you not know that a man’s semen is white and thick and a woman’s is yellow and thin? The likeness goes with that which comes to the top.’ ‘Agreed,’ the rabbis proclaimed…. The rabbis said. ‘But Muhammad, your spirit is an enemy to us, an angel who comes only with violence and the shedding of blood, and were it not for that we would follow you.”
Ishaq:255 “So Allah sent down concerning them: ‘When the Apostle comes to them from Allah confirming that which they have received in scripture, they put it behind their backs as if they did not know it. They follow that which Satan read concerning the kingdom of Solomon - sorcery.’ One of the rabbis said, ‘Don’t you wonder at Muhammad? He alleges that Solomon was a prophet, and yet he was nothing but a sorcerer.’ So Allah sent down, ‘Solomon did not disbelieve but Satan did, practicing sorcery.’” [2:101]
Ishaq:256 “The Apostle wrote a letter to the Jews of Khaybar [before he annihilated them]. In the name of Allah, from Muhammad the Apostle of Allah, friend and brother of Moses who confirms what Moses brought [the Torah]. Allah says to you, ‘O Scripture folk, and you will find it in your scripture “Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah. Those with him are severe against the unbelievers. You see them bowing, falling prostrate, seeking bounty, and acceptance. The mark of their prostrations is on their foreheads.” That is their likeness in the Torah and in the Gospels.’”
Ishaq:256 “The Jews used to ask Muhammad questions which annoyed and confused him.” Ishaq:257 “Your situation seems obscure to us, Muhammad.”
Ishaq:257 “‘O Jews, fear Allah and submit, for you used to hope for the Messiah’s help against the Arabs when we were pagans. You told us that he would be sent and then told us about him.’ A Jew responded, ‘Muhammad has not shown us anything we recognize as prophetic. He is not the one we spoke to you about.’ So Allah revealed, ‘We confirmed what they had, and We sent one they recognized, but they rejected him so We are cursing them.’ The Jews replied, ‘No Covenant was ever made with us about Muhammad.’” “‘Muhammad, you have not brought anything we recognize. And God has not sent down any sign or miracle suggesting that we should believe you.’ So Allah said, ‘We have sent down to you plain signs and only evildoers disbelieve them.’”
Ishaq:257 “The Jews told Allah’s Messenger, ‘Bring us a book. Bring us something down from heaven that we might read it.’”
Ishaq:258 “The Jews used to turn men away from Islam. So Allah said, ‘Many Scripture folk wish to make you unbelievers after you have believed. They are envious. Be indulgent until Allah gives you his orders [to rob them, rape them, sell them into slavery, and murder them.]”
Ishaq:262 “Some Muslims remained friends with Jews, so Allah sent down a Qur’an forbidding them to take Jews as friends. From their mouths hatred has already shown itself and what they conceal is worse.” “You believe in their Book [though you don’t have a clue what it says] while they deny your book, so you have more right to hate them than they have to hate you.”
Ishaq:263 “Abu Bakr went into a Jewish school [there is no mention of him ever going into a Muslim school] and found many pupils gathered around Finhas, a learned rabbi. Bakr told the Jews to fear Allah and submit. He told them that they would find that Muhammad was an Apostle written in the Torah and Gospels. Finhas replied, ‘Why does your god ask us to lend him money as your master pretends.’ Abu was enraged and hit Finhas hard in the face [for telling the truth]. Were it not for the treaty between us I would cut off your head, you enemy of Allah. So Allah said, ‘They will taste Our punishment of burning.’”
Ishaq:264 “Allah revealed concerning Finhas and the other rabbis: ‘Allah issued orders to those who had received the Book: ‘You are to make it clear to men and not conceal it, yet they cast the Torah behind their backs and sold it for a small price. Wretched was their exchange. They will therefore receive a painful punishment.’”
Ishaq:264 “The Torah confirms what Muhammad brought. Rifa’a, a notable Jew, spoke to the Apostle, twisting his tongue: ‘Give us your attention, Muhammad, so that we can make you understand.’ Then he attacked Islam and reviled it. So Allah sent down, ‘Allah knows about your enemies. Some Jews change words from their contexts and say: “We hear and disobey,” twisting their tongues and attacking the religion. But Allah cursed them.’” [2:59 & 4:47]
Ishaq:264 “The Jewish rabbis knew that Muhammad had brought them the truth, but they denied that they knew it. They were obstinate. So Allah revealed, ‘People of the Book, believe in what we have sent down in confirmation of what you had been given before or We will efface your features and turn your face into your ass, cursing you.’”
Ishaq:269 “‘Tell us when the Day of Doom will be, Muhammad, if you are a prophet as you say.’ So Allah sent down, ‘They will ask you about the hour when it will come to pass. Say, only my Lord knows of it. None but He will reveal it at its proper time. Say, ‘Only Allah knows about it but most men do not know.’ How can we follow you, Muhammad, when you have abandoned our Qiblah? And you do not allege that Uzayr [who knows?] is the son of God.’ So Allah revealed, ‘The Jews say that Uzayr is the son of God [no they don’t] and the Christians say the Messiah is the son of God. That is what they say with their mouths, copying the speech of those who disbelieved in the earlier times. Allah fight them! How perverse are they?’”
Ishaq:269 “‘For our part we don’t see how your Qur’an recitals are arranged anything like our Torah is.’ [So Muhammad who couldn’t read said,] ‘You know quite well that the Qur’an is from Allah. You will find it written in the Torah which you have.’”
Ishaq:269 “‘If men and jinn [demons] came together to produce its like they could not.’ Finhas said, ‘Did men or jinn tell you this, Muhammad?’ ‘You know full well that the Qur’an is from Allah and that I am the Apostle of Allah. You will find it written in the Torah you have.’ The rabbi replied, ‘When God sends a prophet, He provides for him, so bring us a book that is divinely inspired that we may read it and determine if you are telling the truth. We can produce our Book.’ So Allah revealed, concerning their words, ‘Though men and jinn should meet to produce this Qur’an, they would not produce its like, even working together.’”
Qur’an 2:40 “O Children of Israel, remember the favors I bestowed on you. So keep My Covenant so that I fulfil your covenant. Fear Me. And believe in what I sent down, confirming and verifying the Scripture which you possess already.”
Qur’an 2:41 “Be not the first to deny or sell My Verses for a small price; and fear Me, and Me alone.” [Another translation reads:] “Part not with My Revelations for a trifling price, getting a small gain by selling My Verses.”
Qur’an 2:43 “[Jews] Perform prayer; pay the zakat tax; bow down and prostrate yourself with Ar-Raki’un (the obedient bowers). You read, recite, and study the Scripture. Why don’t you understand? Nay, seek [Islamic prostration] prayer: It is indeed hard, heavy, and exacting, except for those who obey in submission.”
Qur’an 2:59 “The [Jewish] transgressors changed and perverted the word from that which had been spoken to them to a word distorted; so We sent a plague upon them from heaven, for their evil-doing.”
Qur’an 2:61 “Humiliation and wretchedness were stamped upon the Jews and they were visited with wrath from Allah. That was because they disbelieved Allah’s Proofs, Signs and Verses and killed the prophets. They disobeyed and rebelled.”
Qur’an 2:64 “But you [Jews] went back on your word and were lost losers. You know that you have broken the sanctity of the Sabbath, so We said: ‘Become monkeys despised and hated.’ We made this punishment an example and a warning for those who fear Allah.”
Qur’an 2:79 “But woe to the Jews who fake the Scriptures and say, ‘This is from God,’ so that they might earn some profit thereby.’ And woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for what they earn from it.’”
Qur’an 2:80 “Yet they (Jews) say: ‘The Fire will not touch us for more than a few days…but they are enclosed in error and are inmates of Hell.”
Qur’an 2:85 “Do you [Jews] believe a part of the Book and reject a part? There is no reward for them who so act but disgrace in the world, and on the Day of Doom, the severest of punishment…their torment will never decrease!”
Qur’an 2:89 “The Book was sent to them (the Jews) by Allah verifying and confirming what had been revealed to them already (the Torah and Gospel). They used to pray for victory over the unbelievers - and even though they recognized it when it came to them, they renounced it. The curse of Allah be on those who deny!”
Qur’an 2:101 “When there came a messenger from Allah confirming what was with them, a party of the people of the (Torah and Gospel) Scripture Book fling away the Book of Allah, tossing it behind their backs, as if they did not know!”
Qur’an 2:109 “Quite a number of the People of the Book wish they could turn you [Muslim] (people) back to infidelity after you have believed [submitted], through selfish envy, even after the Truth has become manifest to them. Indulge them until Allah issues his orders.”
Tabari VII:26 “When the Prophet came to Yathrib he saw the Jews fasting on Ashura day. He questioned them, and they said it was the day upon which God drowned Pharaoh and saved Moses from the Egyptians. He said, ‘We have a better right to Moses than you do.’”
Tabari VII:85 “After Muhammad killed many Quraysh polytheists at Badr, the Jews were envious and behaved badly toward him, saying, ‘Muhammad has not met anyone who is good at fighting. Had he met us, he would have had a real battle.’ They also infringed the treaty in various ways.”
Ishaq:232 “The Jews shall contribute to the cost of war so long as they are fighting alongside the believers. The Jews have their religion, the Muslims have theirs. None of them shall go out to war unless they have Muhammad’s permission. The Jews must pay, however, for as long as the war lasts. If any dispute or controversy should arise it must be referred to Allah and Muhammad, His Apostle. If the Jews are called to make peace they must, except in the case of Holy War. Allah approves of this document.”
Tabari VII:85 “What happened to the Qaynuqa [the wealthiest Jewish tribe in Yathrib] was that Muhammad assembled them in their Marketplace and said, ‘Jews, beware lest Allah brings on you the kind of vengeance which He brought on the Quraysh. Accept Islam [submit] and become Muslims [surrender]. You know that I am a Prophet. You will find me in your Scriptures and in Allah’s Covenant with you.’”
Ishaq:363 “The Jews of the Qaynuqa replied, ‘Muhammad, do you think that we are like your people? Do not be deluded by the fact that you met a people with no knowledge and you made good use of your opportunity.’”
Tabari VII:85 “The Qaynuqa were the first Jews to infringe the agreement between them and the Messenger.” [We are not told how they “infringed.” “The campaign of the Prophet against the Banu Qaynuqa was in Shawwal (March 27, 624) in the second year of the Hijrah [migration from Mecca].”
Tabari VII:86 “Gabriel brought down the following verse to the Messenger: ‘If you apprehend treachery from any people (with whom you have a treaty), retaliate by breaking off (relations) with them.’ [8:58] When Gabriel had finished delivering this verse, the Prophet said, ‘I fear the Qaynuqa.’ It was on the basis of this verse that Muhammad advanced on them.”
Ishaq:363 “Allah’s Apostle besieged the Qaynuqa until they surrendered at his discretion unconditionally.”
Tabari VII:86 “Abd Allah [a Yathrib chief] rose up when Allah had put them in his power, and said, ‘Muhammad, treat my ally well, for the Qaynuqa are a confederate of the Khazraj.’ The Prophet ignored him, so Abd Allah repeated his request.” Ishaq:363 “The Prophet turned away from him so Abd Allah put his hand on the collar of the Messenger’s robe. Muhammad said, ‘Let go of me!’ He was so angry his face turned black. Then he said, ‘Damn you, let me go!’ Abd Allah replied, ‘No, by God, I will not let you go until you treat my ally humanely. There are seven hundred men among them who defended me from my foes when I needed their help. And now, you would mow them down in a single morning? By God I do not feel safe around here any more. I am afraid of what the future may have in store.’ So the Messenger said, ‘You can have them.’”
Tabari VII:87 “The Prophet said, ‘Let them go; may Allah curse them, and may he curse Abd Allah with them.’ So the Muslims let them go. Then Muhammad [went back on his word and] gave orders to expel the Jews. Allah gave their property as booty to his Messenger. The Qaynuqa did not have any farmland, as they were goldsmiths. The Prophet took many weapons belonging to them and the tools of their trade. The person who took charge of their expulsion from Yathrib along with their children was Ubadah. He accompanied them as far as Dhubab, saying: ‘The farther you go the better.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N362 “He exiled all the Qaynuqa Jews from Medina.”
Ishaq:364 “Muslims, take not Jews and Christians as friends. Whoever protects them becomes one of them, they become diseased, and will earn a similar fate.”
Ishaq:364 “‘I fear this change of circumstance may end up overtaking us.’ So Allah replied, ‘He will be sorry for his thoughts. True believers perform prostrations, they pay the tax, they bow in homage, and renounce their agreements with the Jews. They are Hezbollah - Allah’s Party.’”
Qur’an 59:2 “It was Allah who drove the (Jewish) People from their [Yathrib] homes and into exile. They refused to believe. They imagined that their strongholds would protect them against Allah. But Allah’s Torment came at them from where they did not suspect. He terrorized them. Their homes were destroyed. So learn a lesson. This is My warning. Had I not decreed the expulsion of the Jews, banishing them to the desert, I would have punished them. They shall taste the torment of Hell Fire.” Qur’an 59:4 “That is because they resisted Allah and His Messenger. If any one resists Allah, verily Allah is severe in Punishment.”
Qur’an 59:6 “What Allah gave as booty to His Messenger, He has taken away from the Jews. Allah gives His Messenger Lordship over whom He will. Whatever booty Allah has given to Muhammad and taken away from the (Jewish) people of the townships, belongs to Allah and to His Apostle.”
Tabari VII:94 “The Murder of Ka’b bin Ashraf, The Evil Genius of the Jews: The Prophet sent messengers to the people of Medina announcing the good news of the victory granted to him by Allah at Badr. They listed the names of the polytheists they had killed.” Ishaq:365 “Ka’b bin Ashraf was from the Jewish clan of Nadir. When he heard the news, he said, ‘Can this be true? Did Muhammad actually kill these people? These were fine men. If Muhammad has slain them, then the belly of the earth is a better place for us than its surface!’” Ishaq:365 “When the enemy of Allah became convinced the report was true, he set out for Mecca. He began to arouse people against Muhammad [i.e., he exposed him]. He recited verses in sympathy for the Quraysh men Muhammad had cast into the pit. Ka’b Ashraf composed the following poetic lines: ‘The blood spilled at Badr calls to its people. They cry and weep. The best men were slain and thrown into a pit.’” Ishaq:365 “Drive off that fool of yours so that you might be safe from talk that makes no sense. Why do you taunt those who mourn over their dead? They lived good lives, and as such we must remember them. But now you have become like jackals.”
Tabari VII:94 “The Prophet said, ‘Who will rid me of Ashraf?’ Muhammad bin Maslamah, said, ‘I will rid you of him, Messenger of Allah. I will kill him.’ ‘Do it then,’ he said, ‘if you can.’”
Bukhari:V4B52N270 “The Prophet said, ‘Who is ready to kill Ka’b bin Ashraf who has really hurt Allah and His Apostle?’ Muhammad bin Maslama said, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Do you want me to kill him?’ He replied in the affirmative.”
Ishaq:365 “‘Who will rid me of Ashraf?’ Maslama said, ‘I will deal with him for you. O Apostle, I will kill him.’ Muhammad said, ‘Do so if you can.’”
Ishaq:365
Tabari VII:94 “Muhammad bin Maslamah said, ‘O Messenger, we shall have to tell lies.’ ‘Say what you like,’ Muhammad replied. ‘You are absolved, free to say whatever you must.’”
Tabari VII:94
Ishaq:367 “Maslamah made a plan to kill Ka’b, the enemy of Allah. Before they went to him, they sent Abu ahead. When he arrived, they spoke together for a while. They recited verses, for Abu was something of a poet. Then Abu said, ‘Ka’b, I have come to you about a matter which I want you to keep secret.’ ‘Go ahead,’ he replied. ‘The arrival of the Prophet Muhammad has been an affliction for us.’ Abu said, ‘Most Arabs are now hostile to us. We cannot travel along the roads, and the result is that our families are facing ruin. We are all suffering.’ Ka’b replied, ‘I warned you that things would turn out like this.’ Abu said, ‘I would like you to sell us some food. We will give you some collateral and make a firm contract. Please treat us generously.’”
Tabari VII:95 “Abu said, ‘We will deposit sufficient weapons with you to guarantee the payment of our debt.’ Abu wanted to fool the Jew so that he would not be suspicious about the weapons when they came bearing them. Abu went back to his companions, informed them of what had happened. He told them to grab their swords and join him. Before leaving, they went to the house of the Messenger. Muhammad walked with them as far as Baqi al-Gharqad. Then he sent them off, saying, ‘Go in Allah’s name; O Allah, help them [assassinate the outspoken Jew]!’ Then the Prophet went back home. It was a moonlit night, and they went forward until they reached Ka’b’s house.”
Ishaq:368 “Then Abu called out to him. He had recently married, and he leapt up in his bed. His wife took hold of the sheets, and said to the strange voice, ‘You are a fighting man; as only a man of war leaves his house at an hour like this.”
Bukhari:V5B59N369 “His wife asked him, ‘Where are you going?’ Ka’b replied, ‘Out with Muhammad bin Maslamah and my brother Abu.’ His wife said, ‘I hear evil in his voice as if his words are dripping blood.’ Ka’b said. ‘They are my brother and my foster brother. A generous man should respond to a call at night even if invited to be killed.’”
Muslim:B19N4436 “Muhammad said to his companions: ‘As he comes down, I will extend my hands towards his head, I will touch his hair and smell it. When you see that I have got hold of his head, strip him. When I hold him fast, you do your job.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N369 “Muhammad said. ‘I have never smelt a better perfume than this,’ so that Ka’b would relax his guard. ‘Will you allow me to smell your head?’ Then Abu thrust his hand into the hair near his temple. When Muhammad got a strong hold of him, he said, ‘Strike the enemy of Allah!’ So they smote him.”
Ishaq:368 “Their swords rained blows upon him, but to no avail. Muhammad bin Maslamah said, ‘When I saw that they were ineffective, I remembered a long, thin dagger which I had in my scabbard. I took hold of it. By this time the enemy of Allah had shouted so loudly lamps had been lit in the homes around us. I plunged the dagger into his breast and pressed upon it so heavily that it reached his pubic region. Allah’s enemy fell to the ground.’”
Tabari VII:97
Ishaq:368 “We carried Ka’b’s head and brought it to Muhammad during the night. We saluted him as he stood praying and told him that we had slain Allah’s enemy. When he came out to us we cast Ashraf’s head before his feet. The Prophet praised Allah that the poet had been assassinated and complimented us on the good work we had done in Allah’s Cause. Our attack upon Allah’s enemy cast terror among the Jews, and there was no Jew in Medina who did not fear for his life.’”
Ishaq:368 “Ka’b’s body was left prostrate. After his fall, all the Nadir Jews were brought low. Sword in hand we cut him down. By Muhammad’s order we were sent secretly by night. Brother killing brother. We lured him to his death with guile [cunning or deviousness]. Traveling by night, bold as lions, we went into his home. We made him taste death with our deadly swords. We sought victory for the religion of the Prophet.”
Tabari VII:97 “The next morning, the Jews were in a state of fear on account of our attack upon the enemy of Allah. After the assassination, the Prophet declared, ‘Kill every Jew.’”
Bukhari:V1B1N6 “Just issue orders to kill every Jew in the country.”
Tabari VII:97
Ishaq:369 “Thereupon Mas’ud leapt upon Sunayna, one of the Jewish merchants with whom his family had social and commercial relations and killed him. The Muslim’s brother complained, saying, ‘Why did you kill him? You have much fat in you belly from his charity.’ Mas’ud answered, ‘By Allah, had Muhammad ordered me to murder you, my brother, I would have cut off your head.’ Wherein the brother said, ‘Any religion that can bring you to this is indeed wonderful!’”
Qur’an 59:14 “The Jews will not unite and fight against you except from behind walls. They hate themselves. You would think they were united, but their hearts are divided. That is because these [Jews] are a people devoid of sense. Like those who recently preceded them [the Meccans at Badr], they [the Jews who were just sent into the desert to die] have tasted the evil result of their conduct. And for them a grievous punishment.”
Qur’an 59:16 “They [the Jews] are like Satan when he tells man, ‘Not to believe,’ When (man) denies, Satan says, ‘I have nothing to do with you. I fear Allah, the Lord of men and jinn!’”
Qur’an 59:17 “Both [Jews and Satan] will go into the Fire of Hell, dwelling therein forever. Such is the reward of the Zalimun (disbelievers and polytheists).”
Qur’an 62:5 “The likeness of those who are entrusted with the Taurat (Torah), who subsequently failed in those (obligations), is that of an ass which carries huge books (but understands them not). Wretched is the likeness of folk who deny the Verses of Allah.”
Qur’an 62:6 “Say: ‘You Jews! If you think that you are friends to Allah, to the exclusion of (other) men, then desire death, if you are truthful!’ But never will they long (for death), because of what their hands have done before them! Allah knows well the polytheists! Say: ‘The Death from which you flee will truly overtake you.’”
Qur’an 3:65 “You People of the Book! Why dispute you about Abraham, when the Law and the Gospel were not revealed till after him? Have you no understanding? Ah! You are those who fell to disputing (even) in matters of which you had some knowledge! But why dispute in matters of which you have no knowledge? It is Allah Who knows, and you who know not!”
Qur’an 3:67 “Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian; but he was a true Muslim, surrendered to Allah (which is Islam), and he joined not gods with Allah.”
Qur’an 3:77 “As for those who sell for a small price the covenant and faith they owe to Allah and their own plighted word for a small price, they shall have no portion in the Hereafter. Nor will Allah speak to them or look at them on the Day of Judgment, nor will He cleanse them: They shall have a grievous torment, a painful doom. There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues. (As they read) you would think it is from the Book, but it is not from the Book; and they say, ‘That is from God,’ but it is not from Allah: It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it!”
Qur’an 3:84 “Say (Muhammad): ‘We believe in Allah and that which is revealed to us and that which was revealed unto Abraham and Ishmael, Isaac and Jacob and the tribes [of Israel], and in (the Books) given to Moses, Jesus, and the prophets, from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered, bowing our will (in Islam).’”
Qur’an 3:85 “If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (Surrender), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who are losers.” Qur’an 3:87 “Of such the reward is that on them (rests) the curse of Allah, of His angels, and of all men, all together. In that will they dwell; nor will their penalty of doom be lightened.”
Tabari VII:156
Ishaq:437 “In the fourth year of the Islamic Era the Prophet expelled the Nadir [a large Jewish community in Yathrib] from their homes.
Tabari VII:158 “Call Muhammad bin Maslamah to me.’ When Muhammad came, he was told to go to the Jews and say, ‘Leave my country. You have intended treachery.’ He went and said, ‘The Messenger orders you to depart from his country.’ They replied, ‘We never thought that an Aws would come with such a message.’ ‘Hearts have changed,’ Muhammad said. ‘Islam has wiped out our old covenants.’”
Ishaq:437 “The Apostle ordered them to prepare for war and to march against them. Muhammad personally led his men against the Nadir and halted in their quarter. The Jews took refuge against him in their homes, so he ordered their date palms to be cut down and burnt. They shouted, ‘Muhammad, you have forbidden wonton destruction of property and have blamed those who perpetrated it. Why are you doing this?’” Qur’an 59:5 “The palm trees you cut down or left standing intact was by Allah’s dispensation so that He might disgrace the transgressors.”
Ishaq:437 “So Allah cast terror into the hearts of the Jews. Then the Prophet said, ‘The Jews have declared war.’”
Tabari VII:159 “The Messenger of Allah besieged the Banu Nadir for fifteen days until he had reduced them to a state of utter exhaustion, so that they would give him what he wanted. The terms in which the Prophet made peace with the Jews were: he would not shed their blood, he would expel them from their lands and settlements, providing for every three of them a camel and a water-skin.” Ishaq:438 “The Jews loaded their camels with their wives, children, and property. There were tambourines, pipes and singing. They went to Khaybar with such splendor as had never been seen from any tribe.” Ishaq:438 “The Nadir left their property to Muhammad and it became his personal possession, to do with it as he wished.”
Ishaq:438 “Allah wreaked His vengeance on the Jews and gave His Apostle power over them and control to deal with them as he wished. Allah said, ‘I turned out those who disbelieved of the Scripture People from their homes. And in the next world I will torment them again with a painful punishment in Hell. The palm trees you cut down were by Allah’s permission; they were uprooted on My order. It was not destruction but it was vengeance from Allah to humble the evildoers. The spoil which Allah gave the Apostle from the Nadir belongs to him.”
Bukhari:V4B52N153 “The properties of Nadir which Allah had transferred to His Apostle as Booty were not gained by the Muslims with their horses and camels. The properties therefore, belonged especially to Allah’s Apostle who used to give his family their yearly expenditure and spend what remained thereof on arms and horses to be used in Allah’s Cause.”
Bukhari:V4B52N176 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘You Muslims will fight the Jews till some of them hide behind stones. The stones will betray them saying, “O Abdullah (slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.”‘”
Bukhari:V4B52N177 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.”‘”
Ishaq:441 “A man who had neither shown treachery nor bad faith haply had a change of fortune and took revenge, cutting down their palm trees and killing the Nadir. A sharp sword in the hand of a brave man kills his adversary. The rabbis were disgraced for they denied mighty Lord Allah.” Ishaq:442 “Sword in hand we brought down the Nadir. By Muhammad’s order we beguiled them.”
Tabari VIII:7 “The Quraysh said: ‘Jews, you are the people of the first Scripture, and you have knowledge about the subject on which we and Muhammad have come to differ. Is our religion better or his?’ ‘Your religion is better,’ they said. ‘You are closer to the truth than he.’”
Ishaq:450 “They are the ones concerning whom Allah revealed: ‘Have you not seen those to whom a portion of the Scripture has been given? They believe in idols and false deities. They say, “These are more rightly guided than those who believe?” - until the words, “Hell is sufficient for their burning. They are jealous and Allah has cursed them.”‘” [4:51]
Tabari VIII:15 “When the news reached Muhammad, he sent Sa’d, chief of the Aws to Ka’b. ‘If it is true, speak to me in words that we can understand but that will be unintelligible to others. So he went out and found them engaged in the worst of what had been reported. They slandered the Messenger and said, ‘There is no treaty between us.’ Sa’d reviled them, and they reviled him. Sa’d was a man with a sharp temper. He told the Jews, ‘Stop reviling him for the disagreement between us is too serious for an exchange of taunts.’”
Ishaq:461 “Just before the noon prayers, Gabriel came to the Apostle wearing a gold turban. He was riding a mule. He said, ‘Have you laid down your weapons and stopped fighting, Muhammad?’ ‘Yes,’ he replied. Gabriel said, ‘The angels have not laid down their arms! I’ve just returned from pursuing the enemy. Allah commands you to march to the Qurayza. I, too, will attack the Jews and shake them out of their homes.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N443-8 “When the Prophet returned from the Trench, laid down his arms and took a bath, Gabriel came to him covered in dust. “Why have you laid down your sword? We angels have not set them down yet. It’s time to go out against them.’ The Prophet said, ‘Where to go?’ Gabriel said, ‘This way,’ pointing towards the Qurayza. So the Prophet went out to besiege them.”
Bukhari:V5B59N444 “The dust rose in the streets of Medina as Gabriel’s regiment marched through. The angels joined Allah’s Apostle in attacking the Qurayza Jews.”
Ishaq:461 “The Messenger commanded a crier to announce that all should heed and obey. He ordered that none should perform the afternoon prayer until after they reached the Qurayza settlement. The Prophet sent Ali ahead with his war banner against the Jews, and the Muslims hastened to it. Ali advanced toward their homes and heard insulting language from the Jews about Allah’s Messenger. Ali ran back and told the Prophet that the Jews were rascals and that there was no need for him to go near those wicked men. ‘Why?’ Muhammad asked. ‘Have you heard them insult me?’ ‘Yes,’ Ali answered. ‘Had they seen me,’ Allah’s Apostle replied, ‘they would not have said anything of the sort.’”
Tabari VIII:28 “Before reaching the Qurayza, Muhammad greeted his Companions. ‘Has anyone passed you?’ he asked. ‘Yes, Prophet,’ they replied. ‘Dihyah ibn Khalifah passed us on a white mule with a brocade covered saddle.’ Allah’s Apostle said, ‘That was Gabriel. He was sent to the Qurayza to shake their homes and terrorize them.’”
Tabari VIII:29 “The Prophet said, ‘No one should pray the afternoon prayer until they are in the territory of the Qurayza because warfare against the Jews is incumbent upon Muslims.’”
Ishaq:461 “The Muslims had been totally occupied with warlike preparations. They refused to pray until they had come upon the Jews in accordance with Muhammad’s order. Allah did not find fault with them in His Book, nor did the Messenger reprimand them for it.”
Tabari VIII:28 “When the Messenger approached the Jews, he said, ‘You brothers of apes! Allah shamed you and cursed you.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N449 “On the day of the Qurayza siege, Allah’s Apostle said to Hassan, ‘Abuse them with your poems, for Gabriel is with you.’”
Ishaq:461 “Muhammad besieged them for twenty-five nights. When the siege became too severe, Allah terrorized them. After the siege exhausted and terrorized them, the Jews felt certain that the Apostle would not leave them until he had exterminated them. So they decided to talk to Ka’b Asad. He said, ‘Jews, you see what has befallen you. I shall propose three alternatives. Take whichever one you please.’ He said, ‘Swear allegiance to Muhammad and accept him; for it has become clear to you that he is a prophet sent from Allah. It is he that you used to find mentioned in your scripture book. Then you will be secure in your lives, your property, your children, and your wives.’” Tabari VIII:30 “The Jews said, ‘We will never abandon the Torah or exchange it for the Qur’an.’ Asad said, ‘Since you reject this proposal, then kill your children and your wives and go out to Muhammad and his Companions as men who brandish swords, leaving behind no impediments to worry you. If you die, you shall have left nothing behind; if you win you shall find other women and children.’ The Jews replied, ‘Why would we kill these poor ones? What would be the good of living after them?’”
Ishaq:462 “Then the Jews asked, ‘Send us Abu Lubaba, one of the Aws,’ for they were confederates, ‘so that we can ask his advice.’ The Prophet complied and the Jews grabbed hold of him. The women and children were crying, so he felt pity for them. They said, ‘Lubaba, do you think we should submit to Muhammad’s judgment?’ ‘Yes,’ he said. But he pointed with his hand to his throat, indicating that it would be slaughter. Lubaba later said, ‘As soon as my feet moved, I knew that I had betrayed Allah’s Apostle. He rushed away and tied himself to a pillar in the mosque. He cried, ‘I will not leave this spot until Allah forgives me for what I’ve done. I betrayed His Apostle.’” Ishaq:462/Tabari VIII:32 “I heard Allah’s Apostle laughing at daybreak; so I said, ‘Why are you laughing, Prophet? May Allah make you laugh heartily!’ He replied, ‘Lubaba has been forgiven.’” Ishaq:463 “He vanished into the night. It is not known to this day what happened to him. Some allege that he was bound with a rotten rope and cast away.”
Tabari VIII:33 “In the morning, the Jews submitted to the judgment of Allah’s Messenger. The Aws [Medina Muslims] leapt up and said, ‘Muhammad, they are our allies. You know what you did the other day with the allies of the Khazraj [another tribe of Medina Muslims]!’ Before besieging the Qurayza, the Messenger had besieged the Qaynuqa, who were the confederates of the Khazraj. They had submitted to his judgment and were banished.”
Bukhari:V5B59N448 “Sa’d said, ‘O Allah! You know that there is nothing more beloved to me than to fight in Your Cause against those who disbelieve Your Apostle. If there remains any fight with the infidels, then keep me alive till I fight against them for Your sake.’”
Ishaq:463 “En route to Muhammad, the Aws said, ‘Treat our client well for the Prophet has put you in charge of this matter. After many requests, Sa’d said, ‘The time has come for Sa’d, in the Cause of Allah, not to be influenced by anyone’s reproach.’ Some of the people who heard him, announced the impending death of the Qurayza before Sa’d Mu’adh reached them because of the words he had said.”
Ishaq:463
Tabari VIII:34 “When Sa’d reached the Messenger of Allah and the Muslims, the Prophet said, ‘Pass judgment on them.’ Sa’d replied, ‘I pass judgment that their men shall be killed, their women and children made captives, and their property divided.’ Allah’s Apostle proclaimed, ‘You have passed judgment on the Jews with the judgment of Allah and the judgment of His Messenger.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N362 “So the Prophet killed the Qurayza men. He distributed their women, children and property among the Muslims.”
Tabari VIII:39 “After the affair of the Qurayza ended, the wound of Sa’d broke open. He prayed saying, ‘O Allah, You know that there are no men whom I would rather fight and kill than men who called Your Messenger a liar.’”
Qur’an 33:26 “Allah took down the People of the Scripture Book. He cast terror into their hearts. Some you slew, and some you made prisoners. And He made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and their goods, giving you a land which you had not traversed before.” [Version two:] “And He drove the People of the Scripture down from their homes and cast panic into their hearts. Some you killed, and you made some captive. And He caused you to inherit their farms, houses, wealth, and land you have not trodden.”
Ishaq:464 “The Jews were made to come down, and Allah’s Messenger imprisoned them. Then the Prophet went out into the marketplace of Medina (it is still its marketplace today), and he had trenches dug in it. He sent for the Jewish men and had them beheaded in those trenches. They were brought out to him in batches. They numbered 800 to 900 boys and men. As they were being taken in small groups to the Prophet, they said to one another, ‘What do you think will be done to us?’ Someone said, ‘Do you not understand. On each occasion do you not see that the summoner never stops? He does not discharge anyone. And that those who are taken away do not come back. By God, it is death!’ The affair continued until the Messenger of Allah had finished with them all.”
Tabari VIII:40 “Allah’s Apostle commanded that furrows should be dug in the ground for the Qurayza. Then he sat down. Ali and Zubayr began cutting off their heads in his presence.”
Tabari VIII:35
Ishaq:464 “Huyayy, the enemy of Allah, was brought out. He was wearing a rose-colored suit of clothes that he had torn all over with fingertip-sized holes so that it would not be taken as booty. His hands were bound to his neck with a rope. When he looked at Muhammad he said, ‘I do not regret opposing you. Whoever forsakes God will be damned.’ He sat down and was beheaded.”
Ishaq:464
Tabari VIII:36 “According to Aisha, one Jewish woman was killed. She was by my side, talking with me while Allah’s Messenger was killing her men in the marketplace.”
Tabari VIII:38 “The Messenger of Allah commanded that all of the Jewish men and boys who had reached puberty should be beheaded. Then the Prophet divided the wealth, wives, and children of the Qurayza Jews among the Muslims.”
Ishaq:465 “When their wrists were bound with cords, the Apostle was a sea of generosity to us.”
Ishaq:465 “Then the Apostle divided the property, wives, and children of the Qurayza among the Muslims. Allah’s Messenger took his fifth of the booty. He made known on that day the extra shares for horses and their riders - giving the horse two shares and the rider one. It was the first booty in which lots were cast.”
Tabari VIII:38 “According to this example (Sunnah), the procedure of the Messenger of Allah in the divisions of booty became a precedent which was followed in subsequent raids.”
Tabari VIII:39 “Then the Messenger of Allah sent Zayd with some of the Qurayza captives to Najd, and in exchange for them he purchased horses and arms.”
Tabari VIII:38 “The Prophet selected for himself from among the Jewish women of the Qurayza, Rayhanah. She became his concubine. When he predeceased her, she was still in his possession. When the Messenger of Allah took her as a captive, she showed herself averse to Islam and insisted on Judaism.”
Ishaq:466 “The Apostle chose one of the Jewish women for himself. Her name was Rayhanah. She remained with him until she died, in his power. The Apostle proposed to marry her and put the veil on her but she said, ‘Leave me under your power, for that will be easier. She showed a repugnance towards Islam when she was captured.”
Ishaq:466 “Allah sent down [a surah] concerning the Trench and Qurayza raid. The account is found in the Allied Troops. In it He mentions their trial and His kindness to the Muslims.”
Ishaq:468 “Allah brought down the People of the Scripture Book. I forced the Qurayza from their homes and cast terror into their hearts. Some you slew, and some you took captive. You killed their men and enslaved their women and children. And I caused you to inherit their land, their dwellings, and their property. Allah can do all things.’”
Ishaq:479 “Slain in Allah’s religion, Sa’d inherits Paradise with the martyrs. His was a noble testimony. When he pronounced his verdict on the Qurayza, he did not judge on his own volition. His judgment and Allah’s were one. Sa’d is among those who sold his life for the Garden of Bliss.” Ishaq:469 “An Ansar [Muslim] recited this poem: ‘The throne of Allah shook for only one man: Sa’d the brave and bold, a glorious leader, a knight ever ready. Stepping into the battle, he cut heads to pieces.”
Ishaq:469 “On the day the Qurayza Jews were slain, one Muslim was martyred. A stone was thrown on him and it inflicted a shattering wound. The Apostle said, ‘He will have the reward of two martyrs.’”
Ishaq:475 “Allah commanded that horses should be kept for His enemy in the fight so they might vex them. We obeyed our Prophet’s orders when he called us to war. When he called for violent efforts we made them. The Prophet’s command is obeyed for he is truly believed. He will give us victory, glory, and a life of ease. Those [Jews] who call Muhammad a liar disbelieve and go astray. They attacked our religion and would not submit.”
Ishaq:481 “The Apostle slew them in their own town. With our troops he surrounded their homes. We shouted out cries in the heat of battle. The Jews were given the Scripture and wasted it. Being blind, [the illiterate man said] they strayed from the Torah. You Jews disbelieved the Qur’an and yet you have tasted the confirmation of what it said. May Allah make our raid on them immortal. May fire burn in their quarter. They will no longer ruin our lands. You [Jews] have no place here, so be off!”
Ishaq:480 “The Qurayza met their misfortune [now there’s an understated word]. In humiliation they found no helper. A calamity worse than that which fell upon the Nadir befell them. On that day Allah’s Apostle came to them like a brilliant moon. We left them with blood upon them like a pool. They lay prostrate with the vultures circling round.”
July 10th, 2007 at 10:01 am
Mein Kampf:
676 “Spiritual terror…men must threaten and dominate men by compulsion. Compulsion is only broken by compulsion and terror by terror.” On the road to power, compulsion follows seduction. And the lever that coerces compulsion is terror. Hitler simply followed Muhammad’s path. Bukhari:V4B52N220 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror.’”
Mein Kampf:677 “Since our view of life will never share power with another, it cannot co-operate with the existing doctrines it condemns. It is obliged to fight by all available means until the entire world of hostile ideas collapses.” Throughout the entirety of the Islamic era we have heard a singular battle cry: Bukhari:V4B53N386 “Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone.” Both men envisioned an eternal battle and total submission.
Mein Kampf:677 “This corrosive fight…for the new program and new view of life [religion] demands determined fighters…and a forceful fighting organization. The recipe for a favorable result requires the formulation of a declaration of war against all existing order [religions and doctrines], and against all existing conceptions of life in general.” Just like Islam, it was the Nazis against the world. The “House of Islam” forever battles the “House of War.” Tabari IX:69 “He who believes in Allah and His Messenger has protected his life and possessions from us. As for those who disbelieve, we will fight them forever in the Cause of Allah. Killing them is a small matter to us.”
The Nazis usurped Muhammad’s dogma. The recipe of “submit and obey” was perfect for empowering their tyrant. Mein Kampf:679 “The strength of a party lies in the disciplined obedience of the members to follow their leadership. The decisive factors are leadership and discipline. When troops battle one another, the victorious one will be that which is blindly obedient to the Superior Leader.” Islam says: Ishaq:601 “The best men launch spears as if they were swords. They peer forward unweariedly. They devote their lives to their Prophet. In hand-to-hand fighting and cavalry attacks they purify themselves with the blood of the infidels. They consider that an act of piety.”
It is hard to distinguish which poligious doctrine was more fixated on violence. Mein Kampf:680 “In order to lead a view of life to victory, we have to transform it into a fighting movement.” Ishaq:587 “Our onslaught will not be a weak faltering affair. We shall fight as long as we live. We will fight until you turn to Islam, humbly seeking refuge. We will fight not caring whom we meet. We will fight whether we destroy ancient holdings or newly gotten gains. We have cut off every opponent’s nose and ears with our swords. We have driven them violently before us at the command of Allah and Islam. We will fight until our religion is established. And we will plunder them for they must suffer disgrace.”
Like Muhammad, Hitler seduced men before he coerced them. He made promises but never delivered. Mein Kampf:683 “The Party with its program of twenty-five points is unshakable.” Ten of the twenty-five Nazi pillars were financial inducements, bribes if you will. Twelve were control mechanisms. Three were focused on fighting. The following Islamic concepts made Hitler’s list in Mein Kampf : “abrogation,” “duty,” “annulment of treaties,” the “confiscation of war booty,” profit sharing or “distribution of spoils,” the party’s cut or “fifth,” “conquest,” “expulsion of nonbelievers,” “alms” or pensions for believers, “Jewish businesses to be looted and divided,” “Jewish land to become communal,” a “ban on Jewish usury,” “Jews to be punished by death,” “the establishment of the laws” of der Fuhrer,” the formation of “an army,” “restrictions on journalists,” and a “recasting of Christianity.” Apart from time and place, der fuhrer’s list was an awful lot like der prophet’s.
Both men were serious about their personal views. It was their way or the highway. Mein Kampf:698 “The N.S.G.W.P. must not become a bailiff of public opinion, but its ruler. It must not be the masse.’ slave, but their master!” Muhammad wasn’t much of a listener either. Qur’an 47.21 “Were they to obey, showing their obedience in modest speech, after the matter of preparation for Jihad had been determined for them, it would have been better.”
If the definition of propaganda is artful deceit, Hitler and Muhammad were grand masters. Mein Kampf:701 “On behalf of our view of life I will strike the weapon of reply from the enemy’s hand personally.” And how might der fuhrer accomplish this? Mein Kampf:702 “Skillful propaganda…. The best proof of this was furnished by the success of the propaganda, introduced by me, against the peace treaty of Versailles. I had before me a surging crowd filled with most sacred indignation and utter wrath. A great lie had been torn out of the brains and hearts of a multitude, and in its stead, a truth had been implanted…. In this meeting I became familiar with the pathos and the gestures which mesmerizing a thousand people demands.” Islam and Nazism share an unhealthy trait, the willingness to link “sacred” to “wrath.” And neither can be trusted as they are willing to abrogate treaties which they do not like. Qur’an 9.3 “And a declaration from Allah and His Messenger to all mankind: ‘Allah is free from all treaty obligations with non-Muslims and so is His Messenger.”
Confirming the role of seductive verbal expression in achieving victory, der fuhrer shared: Mein Kampf:704 “The emphasis was put on the spoken word because only it is in a position to bring about great changes for general psychological reasons. Enormous world revolutionary events have not been brought about by the written word, but by the spoken word.” Mein Kampf:704 “The agitatory activity of speech is bound to have mass influence.” Hitler went on to say that spoken words were like pictures because they communicate more vividly and faster than text. His mentor never allowed his words to be written or read, only spoken. And that’s because: Bukhari:V6B60N662 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Some eloquent speech is as effective as magic.’” Bukhari:V9B87N127 “The Prophet said, ‘I have been given the keys of eloquent speech and given victory with terror so the treasures of the earth were given to me.’”
Expounding upon the merits of Muhammad’s situational scriptures, der fuhrer said, Mein Kampf:706 “The great speaker senses the words that he needs to use in order to impassion his audience. If he errs he has the opportunity for correction. He can read his listener.’ expressions to see if they understand, and can repeat his message until he has convinced them of the correctness of what he has said.” This reminds me of the 8th surah in which Muhammad changed his presentation of the power of Islamic terror on the fly. When his militants appeared displeased with Allah’s proclamation, Muhammad corrected the error and lessened the odds. Ishaq:326 “Abdullah told me that when this verse came down it was a shock to the Muslims who took it hard. They were afraid, as the odds were too great. So Allah relieved them and cancelled the verse with another: ‘Now has Allah relieved you and He knows that there is a weakness among you, so if there are 100 [rather than 20] they shall vanquish 200.’” The 66th verse corrected the 65th. Instant abrogation. Just add grumbling.
Der fuhrer also explained why an oral recital had to be as repetitive as the Qur’an - a word which means “to recite.” Mein Kampf:706 “The great speaker will repeat his message so often, with so many examples, he will overcome objections and refute them before they are even raised.” While the Mecca surahs were fixated on pain and punishment, with the vast majority of the 1,000 repetitions occurring therein, the Medina themes were no less repetitive. They bellowed: submit, obey, perform, pay, and fight.
Hitler and Muhammad learned that their demonic message was most effective when it was revealed in the darkness of night. Mein Kampf:710 “I was astonished by how much better my message was received at night…. It’s a mysterious magic that allows an encroachment upon man’s free will. In the evening they succumb more easily to the dominating force of a stronger will. The domineering apostolic nature weakens their resistance.” Islam’s apostle used the same psychology to weaken men’s resistance: Qur’an 73.1 “Keep watch all the night except a little, reciting the Qur’an as it ought to be recited in slow, measured rhythmic tones. We will soon entrust you with Our weighty Word. Surely the night is the most devout way when the soul is most receptive and the words are the most telling.” The most telling line, “magic allows an encroachment upon man’s free will,” exposes the dark spirit’s agenda. This is why Islam and Nazism are fatalistic and why they are devoted to submission and obedience. If deceit encroaches on man’s free will, we lose our ability to choose Yahweh and to accept his gift of eternal life. When we lose our free will, we lose the ability to love and to know God. When we lose the ability to choose, we die. It isn’t a coincidence that history’s least-free poligious communities have succumbed to doctrines of submission. Death and destruction was not only predictable, it was a predetermined consequence.
Hitler, like his mentor, despised scribes. Mein Kampf:712 “The average sparrow brain of the scribbler produces intellectual babble.” Muhammad dispensed with the verbal assault. He simply killed them.
Mein Kampf:715 “The [mosque] meeting is necessary if only because new adherents of a new movement feel lonely and are easily seized with the fear of being alone. Brought together they sense a greater community…. They are carried away by the powerful effect of the suggestive intoxication and enthusiasm of the others. The crowd confirms the correctness of the new doctrine in his mind and removes doubt. He then succumbs to the magic seductive influence of the [mosque] meeting.” Mein Kampf:717 “God be praised and thanked that unspoilt people avoid bourgeois mass meetings as the Devil avoids holy water.” Togetherness can be as seductive as it is coercive. It is the essence of mob mentality. An evil person with a bad idea can be parlayed into an eruption of uncontrollable rage. Ishaq:580 “Our strong warriors obey his orders to the letter. By us Allah’s religion is undeniably strong. You would think when our horses gallop with bits in their mouths that the sounds of demons are among them. The day we trod down the unbelievers, there was no deviation or turning from the Apostle’s order. During the battle the people heard our exhortations to fight and the smashing of skulls by swords that sent heads flying. We severed necks with a warrior’s blow. Often we have left the slain cut to pieces and a widow crying ‘ala.’ over her mutilated husband.” The study of Islam, like Nazism, is an exposé on gang mentality. Uncorrupted by Islam, or left free to choose, few if any Arabs would have been capable of perpetrating such horrific deeds. Yet as part of Muhammad’s gang of ghouls, they fed off each other’s rage.
Terror and piracy became good because everyone they knew was a terrorizing pirate. This is why Christianity is personal - not collective. The Greek word ekklesia that we errantly translate “Church” really means “a calling out.”
Then sounding like Muhammad in Mecca, der fuhrer preached these words in Munich, Mein Kampf:715 “The man who is the first representative of a new doctrine is exposed to serious oppression and urgently needs the strengthening that lies in the conviction of being a fighter in an embracing body.” Muhammad found his soul mates in Medina. Ishaq:596 “You came to us discredited, when your message was rejected and we believed you. You were forsaken and deserted and we assisted you. You were a fugitive and we took you in, sheltering you. You were poor and in need and we comforted you.”
Mein Kampf:720 “It was important to introduce blind discipline into our meetings and to safeguard the authority of the leader. The brutal recklessness of our guards were able to thwart the enemy’s hecklers.” Speaking as if he were Muhammad, Hitler said, Mein Kampf:726 “Anyone who provoked us was thrown out ruthlessly. We would not tolerate any provocation” Mein Kampf:728 “Before they could finish a sentence they would find themselves thrown outside the hall.” It was no different in Muhammad’s day. Ishaq:246 “Hypocrites used to assemble in the mosque and listen to the stories of the Muslims and laugh and scoff at their religion. So Muhammad ordered that they should be ejected. They were thrown out with great violence. Abu went to Amr, took his foot and dragged him out of the mosque. Another Muslim slapped a man’s face while dragging him forcefully, knocking him down. One was pulled violently by his hair. ‘Don’t come near the Apostle’s mosque again, for you are unclean.’” Even today, they fear truth.
Der fuhrer and der prophet had security detachments. Hitler called the first of these “Storm Troops.” Mein Kampf:729 “I had a protective detachment as a supervision service. They were all young Party comrades who were instructed and trained to the effect that terror can be broken only by terror. By fighting for our idea, they protected me with their last drop of blood. They were saturated with the doctrine. We found that the best weapon of defense was the attack. We became known not as a debating club but as a fighting community. My boys shined when I made clear to them the necessity of their mission, assuring them again and again that all the wisdom in the world will remain futile if force does not enter its service, defending and protecting it. The Goddess of Peace can only march side by side with the God of War.”
Muhammad’s thugs weren’t quite as articulate, but they were no less loyal. Ishaq:580 “We helped Allah’s Apostle, angry on his account, with a thousand warriors. We carried his flag on the end of our lances. We were his helpers, protecting his banner in deadly combat. We dyed it with blood, for that was its color. We were the Prophet’s right arm in Islam. We were his bodyguards before other troops served him. We helped him against his opponents. Allah richly rewarded that fine Prophet Muhammad.”
Like the good Muslims who left their homes to fight jihad for Muhammad, Hitler had helpers too: Mein Kampf:730 “And how these boys stood up! Like a swarm of hornets they stormed upon the mockers at our meeting incurring wounds and making sacrifices so that they made a path for the holy mission of our movement.” Mein Kampf:747 “The boys of the Storm Troop performed their duty. They attacked like wolves…. Our opponents learned a lesson they will never forget.” This is reminiscent of the 8th surah which says: “Inflict upon them such a defeat as will be a lesson for others, that they may be warned.” And the Hadith which substituted one pest for another. Ishaq:564 “The Muslims stole our goods and divided them. Their spears pierced us not once but twice. Their squadrons came at us like a swarm of locusts. Were it not for the religion of Muhammad’s people, their cavalry would never have attacked us.”
Hitler dedicates a number of pages to his personal involvement in choosing the Nazi colors (black and red, symbolizing deceit and blood) and his swastika. Der fuhrer’s fixation on his flag was no different than the prophet’s fixation on his war banners which we were told were white, black, and blood red. Mein Kampf:733 “They became a symbol for the fight of the future…. It had the effect of a flaming torch.” Just as Muhammad had usurped the concept of war banners from his pagan ancestor Qusayy, Hitler recycled an old tradition. Mein Kampf:736 “The swastika had been used as a symbol of the Germanic [pagan] religion by folkish groups in primitive cults.” Even in the details, they were indistinguishable.
This next passage encapsulates Muhammad’s reason for founding Islam. Mein Kampf:752 “Destiny chooses the Man and Destiny gives him the final victory. Dissatisfied with the religious life of his people, he longs for a renovation. Based upon his inspiration he is called upon to present a solution for this religious distress, appearing like a prophet of a new doctrine and as a fighter against the existing ones.” There is no more effective means to rule people than to claim that you are called to be “god’s. prophet, and then to mix your poison with the passion of a pugilist. Ishaq:530 “Get out of his way, you infidel unbelievers. Every good thing goes with His Apostle. O Lord, I believe in his word. I know Allah’s [Fate’s, a.k.a. Satan’s. truth in accepting it. We will fight you about its interpretations as we have fought you about its revelation with strokes that will remove heads from shoulders and make enemies of friends.”
If you were to replace Nature with Allah, this Hitlerism could be Qur’anic. Mein Kampf:752 “The strongest man is chosen for fulfilling the great mission. One Man is the One who is exclusively called upon.” Mein Kampf:753 “They have the purest faith in their own mission, they consider themselves obliged to go their own way without considering others. Nature Herself, in Her inexorable logic, makes the decision by prompting fights and by leading that movement to the goal that has been chosen by the clearest, shortest, and surest way.” Qur’an 59.6 “Allah gives his Messenger Lordship and Power over whomever He wills.” Qur’an 49.7 “And know that among you is Allah’s Messenger: were he to follow your (wishes), you would fall into misfortune….”
By promising “Valhalla,” a seductive, pagan, and hedonistic “paradise” to those who sacrificed their lives for the “cause,” the second tyrant mirrored the first. Mein Kampf:768 “It is certain that each hero who comes forward voluntarily, and dies the sacred death of martyrdom climbs the steps to Valhalla.” This is no different than: Qur’an 4.74 “Let those who fight in the Cause of Allah sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fights in the Cause of Allah, whether he is slain or gets victory - soon shall We give him a great reward.”
Speaking of the Germans who rejected him, Hitler’s never-ending argument replicates Muhammad’s. Mein Kampf:768 “They are ‘scum.’ ‘rabble, deserters, and pimps who shunned the light.’ ‘hyenas.’ ‘freeloaders.’ ‘thieves, and duty shirkers.’ ‘traitors,’ and an ‘undisciplined gang of looters, criminals, and evil rabble.’”
But alas, even Hitler had to outmaneuver and threaten the peaceful hypocrites. Mein Kampf:756 “Some people merely pretend that they are fighting for the same goal, but they do not honestly place themselves into the ranks of our movement.” Qur’an 8.5 “Your Lord ordered you out of your homes to fight for the true cause even though some Muslims disliked it, and were averse to fighting. They argued with you concerning this matter even after it was made clear to them. It was as if they were being driven to their death.”
Der fuhrer was as humble as der prophet. Mein Kampf:763 “One must never forget that everything that is actually great in this world has not been fought for and won by coalitions, but always by the success of One Individual victor. The religious State will never be created by compromise but only by the steel-hard willpower of one sole movement which has struggled its way against all others.” Qur’an 48.1 “Verily We have granted you (Muhammad) a splendid Victory. Qur’an 48.8 “We have truly sent you (Muhammad) as a witness, as a bringer of Good News, and as a Warner: In order that you (men) may believe in Allah and His Messenger, that you may assist him and honor him, and celebrate His praise morning and evening.”
Islam and Nazism seduced a sufficient number of men to become popular enough to build a coercive militant force. Both usurped pagan traditions to condition adherents and then established absolute authority over them. Mein Kampf:765 “If popularity and force unite then authority can be established more solidly based upon tradition. When popularity, force, and tradition combine, authority becomes unshakable.” This is Islam in a nutshell.
Writing words that would come to haunt the world fifteen and then again seventy-seven years after they were scribed by Hitler’s hand, we discover: Mein Kampf:787 “Terror which is derived from a religion can never be broken by a formal State power. It will only succumb to a new view of life that proceeds with equal boldness and determination. The State may for centuries apply the strongest means of power against a terror by which it is threatened, but in the end it will be powerless and will succumb.” Hitler and Muhammad were unaware of a power stronger than hate, and of a tool more effective than terror. That force is love and its implement is truth. And that is how we must fight “terror which is derived from a religion.” We must love the victims of Islam enough to free them from deceit. By emancipating mankind from Muhammad’s legacy we free ourselves from its scourge.
But Hitler was right in a way. Nations like America are unable to break the back of religious terror. We are unwilling to confront a religion. But by not understanding the source of the terrorist.’ rage, we eliminate them far more slowly than the religotic manufactures new ones. And even if we were to shed our ignorance, conventional defensive and offensive military tactics are counterproductive. Offensively, massive armaments and air superiority only prevail against conventional forces. Terrorists scatter, lying in wait to strike another day. And defensively, the freedoms we usurp from our citizens under the guise of “Homeland Security” only serve to create the totalitarian climate in which religious terrorists thrive.
While there is good news, I’m afraid it may be too late. To combat poligious terror we don’t have to become like them, as Hitler attests. All we have to do is come to understand the deceit that drives men to such madness. Collectively, if we were to see Muhammad and his terrorist dogma Islam as we now see Hitler and Nazism, we would win the war on terror by freeing Muslims from Islam. Light extinguishes darkness, and courageous, sacrificial love overwhelms fear, hate, and terror.
While Hitler’s argument was wrong, it remains seductive. A time will come, according to Bible prophets, in which America and Europe will tire of their government.’ inability to thwart the continued onslaught of Islamic terror. They will be tempted, as were 1930s Germans, to employ the services of a similarly-minded tyrant to protect them. Like Hitler, this evil man will rise to prominence promising “peace.” But once empowered, he’ll unleash hell’s fury - literally. The religotic he’ll deploy will be as demonic as Nazism and Islam. Mein Kampf:981 “To end this eternal shame, people will prefer to accept the terror of the moment rather than bear an endless terror any longer.”
Hitler went on to plagiarize two of Allah’s favorite words. Mein Kampf:798 “What we need is not one hundred daring plotters, but many hundreds of thousands of fanatical fighters for our view of life.” Mein Kampf:801 “Give the German nation six million bodies, faultlessly trained, all of them glowing with passion for the highest spirit of attack, and we will have an army.” Qur’an 47.4 “Therefore, when you clash with the unbelieving Infidels in battle, strike them and overpower them. At length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, make them prisoners in bondage until the war lays down its burdens. Thus are you commanded. He lets you fight in order to test you. But those who are slain in Allah’s Cause will never have their deeds go to waste.” Qur’an 47.31 “We shall try you until We know those among you who are the fighters; and We shall try your reported mettle.” Qur’an 47.33 “Believers, obey Allah, and obey the Messenger! Those who disbelieve and hinder men from the Cause of Allah [Jihad], He will not pardon. Do not falter; become faint-hearted, or weak-kneed, crying for peace. You have the upper hand.”
Muhammad’s contemporaries saw him as a lying thief and a murdering bandit. We know this because their criticisms are chronicled in the Qur’an. Hitler was not immune. His contemporaries: Mein Kampf:807 “Lovingly showered upon us the pet names: ‘murderers, bandits, robbers, and criminals.’ But the S.A. [Storm Troop] maintained perfect order…daring to smash the skulls in of those who resisted.” The translators of Mein Kampf provided the grim details. During the formation period of Nazism (1923-1931): “The Hitlerites killed 323 Marxists and seriously wounded 750. Other Nazi rivals lost 48 men. The perpetrators of Mein Kampf suffered 86 dead and 25 wounded.” But as with the initial Islamic terrorist raids perpetrated by Muhammad, one murder quickly led to another. Death became an avalanche. Scores of rotting corpses became hundreds, then thousands, then millions.
Returning to one of der prophet’s favorite themes, der fuhrer protests: Mein Kampf:827 “Systematically, Jewish parasites ravish our innocent young blonde girls and thus destroy the Aryan race. Yet both Christian denominations disregard the desecration and annihilation of the noble and unique race God gave the earth. It is not important whether Protestants vanquish Catholics or Catholics vanquish Protestants, but whether Aryans survive. Any who reject his work thereby declares war on the Lord’s creation and upon his divine will.” Ishaq:262 “Some Muslims remained friends with the Jews, so Allah sent down a Qur’an forbidding them to take Jews as friends. From their mouths hatred has already shown itself and what they conceal is worse.” Qur’an 2.59 “We sent a plague upon the Jews from heaven, for their evil-doing.” Qur’an 5.82 “You will find the Jews and disbelievers [defined as Christians in 5:73] the most vehement in hatred for the Muslims.”
Mein Kampf:845 “Nazism must claim the right to force its principles on the whole and educate everyone about its ideas and thoughts without regard to previous boundaries.” This is an order to impose Nazism on the world and then to indoctrinate the victims. Bukhari:V4B52N196 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been ordered to fight the people till they say, “None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.”‘
Speaking immodestly of how he created his religotic, Hitler shares some extremely relevant insights: Mein Kampf:848 “Great theorists are only in the rarest cases great organizers. The Greatness of the program-maker [religious founder] lies in the recognition and in the establishment of abstractly correct rules, while the organizer has to be a psychologist. He has to take man as he is, and thus must know him. He must not over evaluate him. He must try to account for his weakness and bestial nature so that the program becomes a strong, constant force, suitable for carrying an idea and paving its way to success.” Hitler’s words bind him to Muhammad and separate both men from Moses and Christ. Islam and Nazism see man as lowly and replaceable. They appeal to man’s weakness and bestial nature. They seduce men into becoming a militant force for the benefit of the program-maker. Hitler was even suggesting that Islam was made dimwitted and bestial on purpose. It was as dumb and visceral as the men it was perpetrated upon.
The reason the word “religion” can’t be found in the Old Testament and is only used negatively in the New Testament is that Judeo-Christianity is not a religion, a movement, a cause, a mission, or a program. It’s a relationship that focuses on the spirit, not the flesh.
Mein Kampf:848 “Rarely is a great theorist a great leader. More usually he is an agitator who shows the ability of imparting an idea to the masses as a psychologist and demagogue. For to lead means to be able to move [seduce] the masses.” While I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Muhammad was a great theorist, leader, or psychologist, he was certainly an agitator and demagogue. And two out of five was sufficient to “move the masses.”
Hitler glorified himself using similar terms to those used by Islamic apologists to elevate Muhammad’s status. Mein Kampf:849 “The combination of the theorist [prophet], organizer [politician], and leader [general] in one person is the rarest thing to be found on this globe. This combination makes the Great Man.”
By calling his message “propaganda,” Hitler was being more honest with his audience than was Muhammad. Both knew that they were lying; one had the courtesy to tell us. Mein Kampf:851 “The first task of propaganda [Qur’an recitals] is the winning of people for the future organization [Islam]. The first task of the organization [Islam] is the winning of people for the continuation of propaganda. The second task of propaganda [the Qur’an] is the destruction of existing doctrines [Judeo- Christianity]. The second task of the organization must be the fight for power [Muslim militancy] so that by it will achieve the final success of the doctrine [world religious conquest - total submission].” Tabari IX:82 “The Messenger sent Khalid with an army of 400 and ordered him to invite people to Islam before he fought them. If they were to respond and submit, he was to teach them the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of His Prophet, and the requirements of Islam. If they should decline, then he was to fight them.” Ishaq:245 “The Apostle used to say, ‘Their religion will never march with ours.’”
Mein Kampf:851 “The most striking success of the revolution of a view of life will always be won whenever the new view of life [religotic] is taught [dictated] to all people, and if necessary, is forced upon them.” Neville Chamberlain gave this man the high ground of Czechoslovakia thinking that it would satiate his cravings. That proved as fatal as George Bush’s “Road Map to Peace,” in which he proposed to give the high ground of Israel to the Muslims. One doctrine has, and the other doctrine will, force its view of life on everyone within its reach. Tabari IX:86 “Give the people the good news of Paradise and the way to attain it. Warn them of the Hell-Fire and the way to earn it. Teach them the rites of the hajj…. He orders you to offer prayer at the appropriate times with proper bowing and humility…. He orders you to give one fifth of Allah’s booty and pay the zakat tax. It is enjoined on the faithful from their land and property.” Qur’an 8.39 “Fight them until the only religion is Islam.” When will we learn to read the words on the page? When will we come to understand that tolerating evil leads to disaster?
Islam and Nazism are intolerant, dictatorial fighting machines. Mein Kampf:852 “The highest task of the organization is to see to it that no kind of internal disagreements among the members of the movement weaken the work of the movement. The spirit of determined aggression must not die out. It must be constantly renewed and fortified. It must never lose its fighting force and must propagate the idea with determination and attack.” Mein Kampf:855 “The more radical and inciting my propaganda was, the more it frightened off the weaklings [hypocrites] and prevented them from pushing into the nucleus of our organization.” Hitler would have loved this poem: Ishaq:572 “Muhammad is the man, an Apostle of my Lord who errs not. Any who would rival him must fail. Evil was the state of our enemy so they lost the day. We came upon them like lions from the thickets. The armies of Allah came openly, flying at them in rage, so they could not get away. We destroyed them and forced them to surrender. In the former days there was no battle like this; their blood flowed freely. We slew them and left them in the dust. Those who escaped were choked with terror. A multitude of them were slain. This is Allah’s war in which those who do not accept Islam will have no chance.”
Mein Kampf:856 “Folkish [religious] visionaries procure leadership for themselves and collapse the plots that swirl around them. I was unanimously given the entire leadership of the movement. New articles were accepted which entrusted me with full responsibility and this proved its value in the most blissful manner,” Mein Kampf:858 “All collaborators were made subordinate to me.” Muslim:C22B20N4604 “We used to take oath to the Messenger of Allah that we would listen to and obey his orders. He would tell us to say in the oath: As far as it lies in my power.” Qur’an 48.10 “Verily those who swear allegiance to you (Muhammad), indeed swear their allegiance to Allah.
Nazism was as peaceful as Islam. Mein Kampf:891 “To forge the sword is the task of leadership. The mission is to seek comrades in arms.” Mein Kampf:892 “The correct road is to strengthen our power by winning new soil and territory.” Mein Kampf:950 “We Nazis say: ‘The right to soil and territory is a duty for a great nation must extend its boundaries.” The clues in Mein Kampf that the Nazis were intent on world conquest were no less vague than those found in the Qur’an. Mein Kampf:953 “The German needs only to be given land by the sword.” Bukhari:V4B52N288 “Expel disbelievers from the Arabian Peninsula.’” Qur’an 2.191 “Slay them wherever you find and catch them, and drive them out from where they have turned you out; for persecution and oppression are worse than slaughter.” Qur’an 33.25 “Allah drove the disbelievers back…and helped the believers in battle…. He terrorized the People of the Book so that you killed some and made many captive. He made you inherit their lands, their homes, and their wealth. He gave you a country you had not traversed before.”
Chamberlain wasn’t the only fool. Stalin also signed a “peace treaty” with Hitler years after Mein Kampf was written. Mein Kampf:959 “The conclusion of a treaty with Russia embodies the declaration of the next war.” Der fuhrer, like der prophet, enjoyed projecting his faults on his foes. “We must never forget that the rulers of present-day Russia are common bloodstained criminals, the scum of humanity. They butchered and rooted out millions of leading intellectuals with savagery. They have imposed the most frightful regime of tyranny of all time. The Marxist and their Jewish comrades combine bestial horror and an inconceivable gift for lying. They intend to impose bloody oppression on the whole world. One does not conclude a treaty with someone whose sole interest is destruction.” The only difference between Hitler and Muhammad in the application of this strategy was, Hitler was right.
Der Fuhrer went on to share: “The struggle against the Jewish Marxist conquest of the world requires a clear attitude towards Soviet Russia. You cannot drive out the Devil with Beelzebub [another name for Satan].” This is similar to Lucifer impersonating Gabriel while speaking for Allah and condemning Satan.
Mein Kampf:920 “Peace treaties whose demands are a scourge to a people, frequently beat the first drum roll for a coming rebellion. The boundless extortion and shameful abasement are a means of whipping up national passions to the boiling point. The propagandistic utilization of these sadistic atrocities can remove indifference and raise indignation to the most blazing anger! Every point should be burned into the brain and heart of men until sixty million share the same hate, causing a sea of flames out of whose glow a steely will arises and the cry: ‘We want more arms.’ Yes, a peace treaty could do that. It becomes the greatest propaganda weapon for re-arousing the dormant spirits of a cause.” Mein Kampf:920 “We must reimplant in the people the spirit of proud self-respect, manly defiance, and wrathful hate.” The first Muslims didn’t take kindly to peace treaties either. Tabari VIII:87/Ishaq:505 “The Companions of the Prophet had set out not doubting that they would conquer, because of a vision Muhammad had seen. Therefore, when they saw the negotiations for peace, the retreat, and the obligations the Messenger agreed to - the Muslims felt so grieved about it that they were close to despair. Some were depressed to the point of death.” So… Qur’an 9.3 “An announcement from Allah and His Messenger to the people assembled on the day of the Great Pilgrimage, that Allah and His Messenger dissolve treaty obligations with the Pagans.” And then… Qur’an 9.5 “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”
Telling us how Nazi and Islamic tyrannies would use land-for-peace road-maps to propagate their fury and lead the world to war, der fuhrer explained: Mein Kampf:921 “Everything, beginning with the child’s primer down to the last newspaper, every theater and every picture, every billboard and every wall, must be placed at the service of this single great mission, until the prayer of fear of our patriots cry, ‘Lord deliver us.’ The burning plea must come from even the smallest child: ‘Almighty God, bless our arms! Lord, bless our battle!” The Muslims also had such a “prayer.” Bukhari:V5B59N512 “The Prophet offered the Prayer of Fear when it was still dark and said, ‘Allahu-Akbar! Khaybar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a hostile nation to fight, then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.’ The inhabitants came out running. The Prophet had their men killed, their children and women taken as captives.” Bukhari:V5B59N516 “When Allah’s Apostle fought or raided people we raised our voices saying, ‘Allahu-Akbar! Allahu-Akbar! None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’”
And they went off to wage holy war: Mein Kampf:932 “May Reason be our leader, The sacred duty to act gives us determination, and our highest Protector remains our faith.” Mein Kampf:925 “We may suffer many bitter woes but this isn’t grounds for abandoning Reason with squabbling instead of standing up with a concentrated force against the enemy.” Qur’an 8.60 “And make ready against the infidels all of the power you can, including steeds of war [the Noble Qur’an says these are: tanks, planes, missiles, and artillery] to threaten the enemy of Allah and your enemy. And whatever you spend in Allah’s Cause shall be repaid unto you.” Qur’an 61.14 “O Muslims! Be helpers of Allah…We gave power to those who believed against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed.” Ishaq:441 “A sharp sword in the hand of a brave man kills his adversary.”
Muhammad called his dark spirit a “Protector,” too, even when his armed force was preparing to swoop down, terrorize, and plunder innocents. Ishaq:510 “When the Apostle looked down he said, ‘O Allah, Lord of the heavens and what they overshadow, and Lord of the Devils and what into error they throw, and Lord of the winds and what they winnow, we ask Thee for the booty of this town and its people. We take refuge in Thee from its evil and the evil of its people. Forward in the name of Allah.’ He used to say this of every town he raided.”
Mein Kampf ends as it begins, by praising martyrs, and wrapping overtly religious themes around their death. Mein Kampf:993 “At the end of this volume I want to bring before the eyes of our adherents and of the crusaders for our doctrine those eighteen heroes to whom I dedicated the first volume of my work, as those heroes who consciously sacrificed themselves for all of us. They must always recall the fulfillment of duty, a duty which they fulfilled with the best faith despite the consequences. I want to reckon men who by words, thoughts, and deeds dedicated their lives to the awakening of our nation. I quote from Eckard’s poem: ‘Father in Heaven, resolved to the death, bow we before Thee. Does any other people follow thine awful command more loyally than do we Germans? Then Eternal One, send us the victory, Mighty with Fate. Thou smilest with joy at our holy crusade.”
July 10th, 2007 at 10:15 am
And the cycle completes (repeats) itself:
http://truthpeace.zoomshare.com/files/Hitler_Doc_Popularity/HITLER-POPULARITY.mp4
July 10th, 2007 at 10:29 am
I do not quote holy scripture made up in my head. You want to begin trading Surahs?
Before I go take a hot shower to wash off after this enormous evacuation of Muslm-bashing filth, may I just point out that one little teensy thing wrong with your giant dump of sewer-ahs is that People of the Book are not “unbelievers.” Islam understands itself as organically connected to both Judaism and Christianity although completing, correcting, and superceding the earlier revelations as part of the Abrahamic faith. Unbelievers are atheists and polytheists. Jews and Christians are described as enemies only when they are attacking Islam or Muslims with murderous intent.
I thought you were better than this? I really did, Isidor. I am shocked and it takes a lot to shock me.
July 10th, 2007 at 10:30 am
typo: “I thought you were better than this?”
It wasn’t a question. I thought you were better than this.
July 10th, 2007 at 10:32 am
Islam and Judaism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_Judaism
The water’s hot. Gotta go shower now.
July 10th, 2007 at 11:07 am
In the 1920’s and 30’s in Germany, Jews were the victims of the kinds of lies and smears you have quoted, which included the deliberate distortion of verses from the Torah and the Talmud. So, you really should be above this sort of filth. That’s why I’m shocked that you have quoted such obvious hate-mongering and at such great length.
Here’s just one example you quoted from Craig Winn’s website (http://prophetofdoom.net/):
“Qur’an:2:193 “Fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief) and religion is only for Allah. But if they cease/desist, let there be no hostility except against infidel disbelievers.”
Now from a Muslim website challenging the quote as a deliberate distortion:
” 002.193 “And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief) and religion is only for Allah. But if they cease/desist, let there be no hostility except against infidel disbelievers.” Muslims have been ordered to fight until the only religion is Islam—world conquest. And even when they have overrun the world, there shall be no safe haven for “infidel disbelievers.” This is as clear as a swastika.”
In Arabic, Fitnah does not mean “disbelief” as this deceiver deliberately wrote. It means tumult or evil temptation or spreading evil and disunity among people. In all of the available English translations, not a single one wrote “disbelief” for the word. This is clearly proven as follows:
From http://www.answering-christianity.com/cgi-bin/quran/quran_search1.cgi?search_text=2%3A193&all=1&B1=Search:
Parameter: 2:193
Yusuf Ali:
[002:193] And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.
Transliteration:
[002:193] Waqatiloohum hatta la takoona fitnatun wayakoona alddeenu lillahi fa-ini intahaw fala AAudwana illa AAala alththalimeena
Arabic (from right to left):
?2:193 ???????? ??? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?????? ???????? ??? ??? ????????
Sher Ali:
[002:193] And fight them until there is no persecution, and religion is professed only for ALLAH. But if they desist, then remember that no hostility is allowed except against the wrongdoers.
Shakir:
[002:193] And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors.
Pickthall:
[002:193] And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers.
Sale:
[002:193] Fight therefore against them, until there be no temptation to idolatry, and the religion be God’s: But if they desist, then let there be no hostility, except against the ungodly.
Muhammad Al-Hilali & Muhsin Khan:
[002:193] And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimoon (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)
Palmer:
[002:193] But fight them that there be no sedition and that the religion may be God’s; but, if they desist, then let there be no hostility save against the unjust.
Arberry:
[002:193] Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is God’s; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers.
Khalifa:
[002:193] You may also fight them to eliminate oppression, and to worship GOD freely. If they refrain, you shall not aggress; aggression is permitted only against the aggressors.
Rodwell:
[002:193] Fight therefore against them until there be no more civil discord, and the only worship be that of God: but if they desist, then let there be no hostility, save against the wicked.
I’d like to ask Mr. Winn to show us where he got his translation from?
Or does such “translation” exist from the first place?”
http://www.answering-christianity.com/craig_winns_list_of_lies.htm
Note that although al-Hilali uses the word “disbelief” it is clear that “(disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah)” means the fostering of polytheism, i.e. “spreading evil and disunity among people.”:
July 10th, 2007 at 11:13 am
The translation of 2:193 by Muhammad Asad, a Jewish convert to Islam (aka Leopold Weiss):
2: 193
“Hence, fight against them until there is no more oppression and all worship is devoted to God alone;* but if they desist, then all hostility shall cease, save against those who [wilfully] do wrong.”
Notes:
* Lit., “and religion belongs to God [alone]” - i.e., until God can be worshipped without fear of persecution, and none is compelled to bow down in awe before another human being. (See also 22: 40.) The term din is in this context more suitably translated as “worship” inasmuch as it comprises here both the doctrinal and the moral aspects of religion: that is to say, man’s faith as well as the obligations arising from that faith.
July 10th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
John:
What you refer to as:
” . . enormous evacuation of Muslm-bashing filth”
are merely exact quotes from the Muslim Scriptures. I did not author these things, nor do I asribe to them.
Do you deny the authenticity of any of the referenced Scriptural verses?
If not, get off it. And the “filth” you are trying to wash off is on the inside.
July 10th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Do you deny the authenticity of any of the referenced Scriptural verses?
I just got through denying the accuracy of one of them. And I explained to you why most of the interpretations are bullsh*t and on a par with the anti-Jewish quotations in Der Sturmer. You are getting your info from an Islamophobic tabloid website. I wouldn’t count on any of those verses saying what you/Craig Winn purport.
When it comes to distorting Islam and twisting the Quran to make it appear to say something it does not, you put Osama bin Laden in the shade, Isidor.
July 10th, 2007 at 3:09 pm
“I just got through denying the accuracy of one of them.”
Assuming your translation is the accurate one, that equals one out of hundreds I posted.
I do not pretend to be any expert in Arabic. However, there are three popular (standard) translations of the Qur~an, found in various places and they all seem to be different. I have clipped and pasted from:
www.prophetofdoom.net
That web site has hundreds more versus that I did not bother to post. I do not know that all the items posted there are translated correctly or for that matter (as already said) that there is any true single translation. However, to assert that all these versus are NOT being tought in Islamic schools is probably beyond your expert ability also.
You see John:
If you tell me that the early Hebrews were war-like and even that they sacreficed children, I would not debate you. Nor would I take offense. It was what it was. Maybe some such stories were over-hyped and maybe some true stories were omitted entirely from the record. However, your blanket assertion that the entirety of the quotes re-posed amounts to “Muslim bashing filth” is not supported by your somewhat lame dispute of one verse. Are you suggesting that someone when through ALL that scripture and modified it ALL for the sole purpose of defaming the original meaning and needlessly alarming the general public?? Quite a lot of work — that could be easily exposed as a fraud. To date, you are the only person who has actually claimed that these verses have been falsified, and I blog on some Muslim web sites where the attendees are authentic Arabs, living in the M.E. As I said, you have only disputed one.
July 10th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
PS>
Pls see:
http://www.prophetofdoom.net/Qurans.Islam
For a cross-reference on the translations.
I would just as soon (prefer to be) be wrong John and willingly admit such. Its just that YOU have not shown me where.
July 10th, 2007 at 3:42 pm
“Al-Qaeda threatens ‘response’ to Rushdie knighthood . . ”
“Al-Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri said on Tuesday the group is preparing a “precise response” to Britain’s decision to bestow a knighthood on author Salman Rushdie.
“I say to (Britain’s Queen) Elizabeth and (former British Prime Minister Tony) Blair that your message has reached us and we are in the process of preparing for you a precise response,” Zawahiri said in an audio recording posted on an Internet website often used by Islamic militants.”
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070710161307.7o8pz62c&show_article=1
(RUSHDIE . . THAT JEW-BASTARD!)
July 10th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
As I said, you have only disputed one.
Yes, I’m saying some group of pretty determined Muslim-haters scoured the Quran looking for hateful verses. A lot of them. And you say you didn’t post all of them? My Lord, how many of them are there?
Are you telling me that you have posted this stuff on a blog visited by Muslims and nobody raised an eyebrow?? Go to the website I linked to and listen to the debate between the Muslim and Winn.
Yes, I disputed the accuracy of one, or a Muslim did. But I gave you a principle of interpretation which should knock out a substantial number of them, i.e., that Jews and Christians, both monotheists, are not “Unbelievers.”
Many of the verses attempt to make the case that Islam is an intolerant religion. It is intolerant of atheism and polytheism perhaps, but it is very tolerant of Jews and Christians, because they are “family,” their religions like Islam being part of the religion of Abraham.
The other thing the website tries to do is use verses to show that Islam encourages Muslims to wreak violence upon those who do not submit. In some of those verses, we are talking about submission to the Islamic political system. But in other cases, violence is only being sanctioned because the Muslim community is being expelled and attacked by Jews and Christians and polytheists from Mecca. The general ethic toward outsiders is the same as the Jewish: leave people alone as long as they don’t mess with you with murderous intent, and then fight back for all you’re worth and God will defend you.
ALL of the verses have been taken out of context, I can guarantee you. I don’t intend to waste my time disputing verse by verse all of those hateful lies. I do not plan on going back to that website, period. BTW, If you want to know what “fitnah” means, a good example is that Quran = Mein Kampf stuff on that website.
Al Qaeda is bad. The few are not the many. Alhamdulillah.
July 10th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
Here’s another thing which knocks down the vast majority of the Quranic quotes from the website in a single stroke. I quote again from the Asad translation and his notes:
Surah 2: 256
THERE SHALL BE no coercion in matters of faith.* Distinct has now become the right way from [the way of] error: hence, he who rejects the powers of evil** and believes in God has indeed taken hold of a support most unfailing, which shall never give way: for God is all-hearing, all-knowing.
* The term din denotes both the contents of and the compliance with a morally binding law; consequently, it signifies “religion” in the widest sense of this term, extending over all that pertains to its doctrinal contents and their practical implications, as well as to man’s attitude towards the object of his worship, thus comprising also the concept of “faith”. The rendering of drn as “religion”, “faith”,”religious law” or “moral law” (see note 3 on 109: 6) depends on the context in which this term is used. - On the strength of the above categorical prohibition of coercion (ikrah) in anything that pertains to faith or religion, all Islamic jurists (fugahd’), without any exception, hold that forcible conversion is under all circumstances null and void, and that any attempt at coercing a non-believer to accept the faith of Islam is a grievous sin: a verdict which disposes of the widespread fallacy that Islam places before the unbelievers the alternative of “conversion or the sword”.
**250 At-tdghut denotes, primarily, anything that is worshipped instead of God and, thus, all that may turn man away from God and lead him to evil. It has both a singular and a plural significance (Razi) and is, therefore, best rendered as “the powers of evil”.
Islam was “spread by the sword” in the sense that ALL religions at that time were the religions of entire countries, and if one country conquered another it also conquered it’s gods, i.e, the religion of the conqueror became the religion of the conquered country. I think Islam may have been fairly unique in allowing non-Muslim minorities to continue their own faith, as long as they were not idol-worshippers (meaning Christians, in some periods).
July 10th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
A Jew or a Christian in a Muslim country was not an “Unbeliever” but a dhimmi, i.e., had a special social status which meant he was taxed at a higher rate. Most rulers adhered to the rule against forced conversions, though the Shia were less consistent observers of the rule.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi
July 10th, 2007 at 6:02 pm
“My Lord, how many of them are there?”
Official count . . .
A LOT!
“Are you telling me that you have posted this stuff on a blog visited by Muslims and nobody raised an eyebrow??”
I am saying that I have been blogging on a official MUSLIM web site for years and I have NOT been the one posting the quotes (bad form) but numerous others have and no one disputes the actual quotes as being accurate or authentic. Generally, any debate relates not to the translations but like you did, someone will post a counterveiling surah.
I know this may sound funny but on that web site I am known for (somewhat heroically) defending Muslim people, while here I have to fend you off.
So, either I am a pot-sturrer or I occupy a center position. I am not generally accused of being the former.
July 10th, 2007 at 6:37 pm
I know this may sound funny but on that web site I am known for (somewhat heroically) defending Muslim people, while here I have to fend you off.
That’s because you off-fend me.
) Seriously, it does not sound funny that you defend Muslims there. That is why I was so shocked that you would post these satanic verses, as it were. I know I off-fend you a lot too. Sorry.
Any one of the verses may be fairly inoffensive and could be countered with another verse that would be its opposite. But the number of them was meant in itself to support the thesis that the Quran is shot through with hateful, submission-or-death, death-to-Infidels, kill-the-Jews, rhetoric which is not the case.
Perhaps taken singly the effect is not so over-powering. But there was a LONG list of them and all in support of this crazy idea Quran = Mein Kampf, that Nazism and Islam are evil twins. I think this guy Craig Winn must be a real Muslim-hater. I know you are obviously not. That’s why I was shocked.
I have studied Arabic and Islam somewhat, but much of what I know specifically about the Quran I have picked up from Wikipedia and other places on the web from defending Islam here on this blog. I must say, the more I learn about what it is really like the better I like it. So if anybody is hoping to convince me that all Muslims are closet-jihadis, it’s having the opposite effect. In particular, as you know, I have been impressed with the translation by Muhammad Asad, the converted Jew aka Leopold Weiss. He died in 1992 but before his death was UN Amb. from Pakistan. He was born in Austria to a long line of rabbis and lost both parents to the Holocaust. He was a journalist in the ME when he converted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Asad
July 10th, 2007 at 6:51 pm
Frankly John:
I don’t personally care what the various scriptures translate to. Any of them. I have aquired my own understanding of the universe and have no need for a group of others to support my beliefs. If one thinks about it, human nature almost dictates that people need a group (the larger the better) to help believe anything which can not be seen by the eyes or heard with the ears. Everyone knows the old story about the two guys who thought they saw a UFO.
“What did you just see?”
“I didn’t see anything. Did you see anything?”
“Nope, not a thing”
That is (IMHO) the primary religious struggle that humanity faces. Everyone wants a relationship with God but their general belief structure is so weak that they need a LOT of other people, who are willing to assert they see the SAME God.
You wrote:
“So if anybody is hoping to convince me that all Muslims are closet-jihadis, it’s having the opposite effect.”
Quite the contrary. Muslims are people. If they are peaceful people then they will be peaceful Muslims.
That does not change the (scientific) translations as posted.
Either these are accurate or they have been modified for a cause. I do not know enough to be certain. My gut instinct (for reasons already mentioned) is that many of these are legitimate and accurate translations, your denials not withstanding. I have not concluded you are an objective person. Sorry.
July 10th, 2007 at 7:24 pm
I will look at the satanic verses, but the Quran = Mein Kampf crap in post #14 is an insult to rationality and you can just forget about that, coz I’m not going to look at it.
Just glancing at the parallel translation lists, it looks to me like Winn and his team of “experts” have cherry-picked the translations that are most incendiary-sounding to use as their proof-texts. This is not scholarship, of course. And the whole thing is based on fallacies about Islam which he tries to support with these proof-texts while ignoring very important facts which blow apart the fallacies, such as the fact which Asad pointed out:
“…all Islamic jurists (fugahd’), without any exception, hold that forcible conversion is under all circumstances null and void, and that any attempt at coercing a non-believer to accept the faith of Islam is a grievous sin: a verdict which disposes of the widespread fallacy that Islam places before the unbelievers the alternative of “conversion or the sword”.”
That being the case, it doesn’t matter if you have a thousand verses which have been translated by one or another of ten different translators that sound like Submit-or-Die, they cannot have that meaning. Each verse of the Quran has to be interpreted in the context of the overall system of Islamic law.
It is possible to extract from the New Testament in Matthew a saying of Jesus that goes,
“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.”
I don’t know what the hell that means. It is much-debated and discussed. But I am quite confident whatever it means it does not refer to the destruction of families or promoting holy war. Whatever it means will have to be worked out in the context first of all of Matthew, then the other gospels including Thomas, then historical theology, etc. It will have to be seen within various whole systems of thought. Is the problem the inaccuracy of the translation? No. Is the quotation accurate? Yes, but.
I’m not concerned that you don’t think I’m objective, but I hope you understand where I’m coming from. Craig Winn began with the fallacies and with them in hand went looking in the Quran for proof-texts to support his cockeyed theory. He then picked the translations of individual verses that suited his purposes best. That is bass-ackwards from the way it’s supposed to be done. You are supposed to draw the meaning out of the text (exegesis) not import it from outside and put it into the text (eisegesis).
July 10th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
“For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.”
Here is the official Troll interpretation, as extrapolated from other (Gnostic) scriptures:
(t actually relates to my earlier comment regarding support).
What he is saying is that under the circumstances which existed at the time, joining his movement had the collateral effect of incrimonating one’s family-members. That in high likelyhood, the non-following family-members might well disown the follower and might even cooperate with the Roman authorities (and other mainly puppet authorities) in arresting the follower. This in turn would create giant conflicts between (even the non-following family-members), some of whom wanted to outwardly and voally oppose the follower and others who wanted merely to ignore him/her. Basically: A shit-storm.
If one appreciates that organized religion is foremost, a form of a portable tribe, all other issues fall into focus. That is all for today. That is all the enlightment you deserve–probably more then you deserve — considering your earlier poor conduct towards the Troll Rebbe.
July 10th, 2007 at 8:36 pm
Isidor, I’ve wasted all the time I am willing to give of the time that’s left to me on this plaent looking at this crackpot’s ravings. Reading this guy is like reading UFO-ology combined with the most incredible (literally!) anti-Muslim bigotry I have ever encountered. His objective is to assail the Quran as religiously worthless. It’s truly ridiculous. What he tries to do is show what is known about the textual history and redaction and editing and transmission of the text in order to “prove” that it could not possibly be a revelation from God. He is obviously an ardent fundamentalist and no doubt assumes that the Bible was delivered from heaven on book by book on flawless sheets of paper only needing to be bound together to form the King James Version in English. His next tactic is to assail the nature of the Arabic language itself, claiming that it didn’t even exist when the Quran was written down but developed from Syriac. This is a total load of you know what. He knows nothing. A couple of quotes may give you the flavor of his writing:
“Yet, the Qur’an is a horrid book by any criterion. It promotes terrorism. It condones rape, incest, thievery, kidnapping for ransom, the slave trade, mass murder, and worst of all, world conquest by way of the sword. It is nauseatingly repetitive, foolishly plagiarized, contradictory, and false scientifically
and historically. And it’s a literary disaster with grammatical errors, missing words, and meaningless words. One out of every five verses is senseless. The speaker ducks in and out of first, second and third person and doesn’t know
if he is one or many. He doesn’t even know his name. There are no intelligent transitions. And it’s jumbled together haphazardly…” (Islam’s Dark Past, p. 22)
He spends a lot of time defaming Muhammad. Here’s a sample of that:
“As an interesting aside; I am routinely threatened by Muslims who assail my character in colorful ways. They claim that I know nothing about Islam and that my words are offensive, repulsive, disgraceful, bigoted, hateful, intolerant, mean spirited, and #%$&*. But little do they know, they are not my
words. All I have done is report what Islam has to say about itself. Apart from the Sira-Ta’rikh-Hadith collections of Ishaq, Tabari, Bukhari, and Muslim, nothing is known about Muhammad or Islam. The Qur’an literally disintegrates without them, since without context and chronology, it is gibberish.
This puts Muslims in a hellish predicament. If the Hadith compilations of Ishaq, Tabari, Bukhari, and Muslim are true, their prophet was the most evil man who ever lived—a bloodthirsty pirate, a ruthless terrorist, and a sexual pervert. His Islam was nothing more than the Profitable Prophet Plan. Allah was just one of many moon rocks. That’s not good. But if the Hadith compilations of Ishaq, Tabari, Bukhari, and Muslim are not true, Islam evaporates.” (Islam’s Dark Past, p. ix)
That btw is from his Appendix. It goes on like that for 69 pages. There is nothing to any of this but bigotry, absolute bigotry. Isidor, this man is a raving lunatic.
Now, I said I would look at the Quranic verses. I did about five pages worth. The bloody verses he quotes come from chapters which have to be put in their proper chronological sequence to understand what was going on at the time they were written. The rest of his material comes from those collections of hadith he refers to. In every case I could find, he begins with his quite astonishing prejudices and bigoted assumptions and reads the texts accordingly. He believes Islam is blood-thirsty and warlike and so when he reads hadith that tell of the battles of the early Muslims this proves to him that Islam is blood-thirsty and warlike, even though the accounts are no different than the stories of Joshua and the Conquest of Canaan in the Bible (which is far-superior and is actually of course the Revealed Word of God).
All he succeeds in showing is that he very obviously hates Muslims and hates Islam and hates Muhammad with a passion:
“So it all comes down to this: If the Hadith Collections of Ishaq, Tabari, Bukhari and Muslim are true, Muhammad was the most evil man who ever lived, Allah was the most demented god ever conceived, and Islam was the most vile doctrine ever imposed on humankind. If, however, the Hadith Collections are untrue, then nothing is known of Muhammad, the conception of his god, or his formation of Islam. There is no rational reason to believe it, observe it, suffer under it, or die for it.” (Islam’s Dark Past, p. 66)
This is all quite preposterous. As far as I know, nothing he says is true. He is one sick puppy.
July 10th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Sorry. I meant to put this quote in too, because it shows his prejudicial approach to the Quran:
“But you don’t have to dig very deep to find the truth. Even a cursory reading
of the Qur’an is sufficient to prove that it is a fraud. There is no way the
creator of the universe wrote a book devoid of context, without chronology
or intelligent transitions. Such a creative spirit wouldn’t need to plagiarize. He
would know history and science and thus wouldn’t have made such a fool of
himself. The God who created man wouldn’t deceive him or lead him to hell
as Allah does. Nor would he order men to terrorize, mutilate, rob, enslave,
and slaughter the followers of other Scriptures he claims he revealed, wiping
them out to the last. One doesn’t need a scholastic review of the Qur’anic text
to disprove its veracity. It destroys itself quite nicely.” (Islam’s Dark Past, i)
That last sentence sounds pretty nutty. A smidge too ghoulish IMHO. Enough.
July 10th, 2007 at 10:36 pm
“Kill the Infidels. Surah 9:5″
http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/jihad/kill_the_infidels.asp
Since 9-11, this is the most oft-quoted Quranic verse by critics of Islam. The enlightening exposition of this single verse at the link above ought to be sufficient to lay this entire issue to rest.
July 11th, 2007 at 1:55 am
John:
You have done quite a bit to talk around the core issues. The addl. commentary you posted, from the author of the Web page I had referenced is really not the issue at all. Whether he hates the Islamic Prophet Mohammed or not — is not the issue. Whether he is an “Islamaphobe” or a “Jesu-phile” is likewise not relevant.
The discussion related to whether of not the Islamic versus directly quoted with Surah and verse were accurately translated. The secondary core issue was if there really is any ‘accurate’ or reliable single meaning or, if the integrity of the material is already compromised by multiple (conflicted) translations. You did not do a lot to clear up these questions. You spoke mainly around them. Likewise, your comments earlier migrated from a discussion as to the correct translation of the Qur~an into a debate as to if “all Muslims are jihadists”. Again, one question is purely a scientific one, if the versus quoted are being accurately translated and the other subject is totally a subjective one, which you raised in a blanket condemnation of the translations.
My feeling is thus:
God does not speak in words. Not in Hebrew, not in Latin and not either in Arabic.
If He did, there is still no guarantee that these words have been accurately preserved.
Rather, God ’speaks’ in a pure form of intelligence that we humans all (not just Moses or Jesus or Mohammed) have equal access to. And here is the thing: This wave-length can not be accurately written down (even if accurately understood) because it is more like a song then a textbook. For example, take some ‘depression’ era songs and play them to people who have no references to that era and they sound bizarre. Escaping from chain-gangs, moving out of Oklahoma, company stores, coal mines, and so forth. My song, may not apply to your situation and visa-versa. Moreover, my song may only apply to my own situation for a day, a minute or some flittering period of time.
What (IMHO) people have written down and called the word of God is in reality, a civics lesson to delineate and describe a portable tribe.
Tribes go back to the dawn of time. For umpteen thousands of years, a tribe would be defined by geography. E.g.: ‘the people who lived between this bog and that river.’
At a certain point in history, humans developed two things:
the ability to translate languages and the ability to move goods from place to place. This meant that tribes-men were going to be intermixed geographically. Hence began the age of poly-theism. Gods were ranked by popularity and over time, some came and some went. To preserve peace, mixed populations would simply sport whatever Gods they wanted and none was any threat to another.
As populations solidified and grew, patience for ‘outside’ Gods or new ‘Gods’ diminished. Essentially, the world reached its limits and there became no new room for more Gods. This was the birth of monotheism. As it turns out, the concept of one God is actually closer to reality then multiple Gods. But not in the way this may sound to the average ears. One God is closer to truth then ‘many Gods’ because in reality, the true answer is none. None in the sense that none exists which fit the pattern or description that humans have contrived. God did NOT create humans in His image. Humans created the caricature of God in their own mirror-image. So one is closer to reality but the real and true answer is: None of the above.
Jews managed to be both blessed and cursed for having done this.
Blessed in the sense that they had come closer to the divine reality. Cursed in that it was not close enough and worse, that successive tribes would re-configure this concept to mirror their own tribal image. The reconfigurations would create a schism and point of endless contention. The Jews became like the person who discovered the crime scene. The first and most viable suspect. Whereas at first, they were responsible for doing away with multiple Gods they later became seen as the group most responsible for maintaining the extra (false) versions of divinity.
God represents not only humans but every sentient life-form on this planet and probably throughout this universe.
We monkey-people have become intoxicated with our self glorification and singular ‘blessed’ condition. We make a LOT of mistakes and not just stupid ones. We make mistakes of vanity and greed and brutality. When we will stop making the judgment errors our intellect will automatically advance. That is called evolution. That is the purpose of life. If life can not achieve that purpose, it will not be the purpose that will end.
So sayeth the Troll Rebbe.
July 11th, 2007 at 6:36 am
Again, one question is purely a scientific one, if the versus quoted are being accurately translated and the other subject is totally a subjective one, which you raised in a blanket condemnation of the translations.
You posted about ten to fifteen pages of quotes from the Quran and hadith and Mein Kampf and attempted to show equivalence. Since Craig Winn does not read Arabic, in order to make his point, for each verse he cherry-picked among five English translation to make his point.
First of all, this is a completely bogus approach which calls into question the entire enterprise. If the case is strong, why does he need to cherry-pick instead of just using a single translation for all his quotes (if he is not translating them all himself)?
Secondly, since this approach is not objective it automatically leads him into error. He is choosing among the translations verse-by-verse not on the basis of accuracy, as you put it, but which sounds most gruesome or otherwise makes his point.
The verse 2:193 shows clearly how this works (see the Muslim’s refutation). He picked the one translation that used the word “disbelief” for the word “fitnah” though all the others did not.
The third problem with his approach that affects the accuracy of his verses is that he completely ignores historical context. Historical context is indispensible in interpretation of Quranic verses and in even understanding what they say in many cases. The quotations are thus dishonest.
So, no I don’t think you are entitled to claim they are scientifically accurate. Accuracy was not what he was after. The translations were not chosen for accuracy. Scientifically speaking, they are inaccurate and his method almost guarantees that. If the translations are accurate or the best available (Pickthall’s translation was done around 1920) it is entirely by accident.
He did not present any one single verse in isolation. He presented ten to fifteen pages of them together without informed explication. And because of his method of “translating” them - cherry-picking translations while ignoring context - his presentation was inaccurate, subjective, tendentious, and completely dishonest. Again, if any of the translations in isolation is accurate, it is entirely by accident, because he chose from five going verse-by-verse, a method virtually guaranteed to select for least-accurate, least-reliable, least-trustworthy. He gave a ratsass about checking for accuracy, so don’t expect me to go back and do that for him as an afterthought. His presentation is a joke and appears to be the product of mental illness. He is a nutjob, Isidor. I wouldn’t put my name over this stuff in the future.
If Muslims have raised no objections to quotations of single verses as to accuracy, that is perhaps understandable because it is well-known in Quranic studies that one often has to cite balancing verses to get the whole story on a given subject. And so a Muslim would simply cite a balancing verse in that case. I cannot believe however there would be no adverse reaction on a Muslim website to an assault on their religion from a non-Muslim using ten to fifteen pages of verses from the Quran to defame Islam, the Prophet, and the Quran itself. No way.
July 11th, 2007 at 6:39 am
So sayeth the Troll Rebbe.
Trollstein is not a troll but definitely could be the Golem.
July 11th, 2007 at 7:24 am
John:
I didn’t know that any creature could be a downgrade from a Troll.
“In Jewish folklore, a golem (גולם, sometimes, as in Yiddish, pronounced goilem) is an animated being created entirely from inanimate matter. In modern Hebrew the word golem literally means ‘cocoon’, but can also mean “fool”, “silly”, or even “stupid”.
No thanks. I’ll stick with Troll King.
As for your other points, cherry-picking from the varied translations might explain some degrade factor to the overall credibility. I’ll agree that far. But not nearly as far as you assert, that doing such creates a totally useless and false result.
Regarding your claim about “out-of-context”:
Bullshit on a stick.
The Qur~an skips around from one context to the next and back again. It therefore has no standard type “context” that say for example, a political speech might. Taking it “out-of-context” could just as easily therefore improve the accuracy of any given verse.
You want to convert to Islam, be my guest. Few would miss you.
July 11th, 2007 at 7:42 am
The Qur~an skips around from one context to the next and back again.
No. Entire surahs and even groups of surahs were written in identifiable historical contexts. I did not say topical contexts; historical. Take the 9th Surah for example, from which many of his bloody quotations come:
from the link above re: surah 9:5
“(5) …[W]e can now investigate verse (9:5), “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.” One of the main concerns of Chapter (Surah) 9 of the Quran (a Surah is a collection of verses) was to delineate the strategies for dealing with the polytheists of the Arabian Peninsula after the Muslims, under the leadership of Prophet Muhammad, peacefully captured Mecca (In January, 630, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his followeres were joined by tribe after tribe along their way to Mecca. They entered Mecca without bloodshed and the Meccans, seeing the tide had turned, joined them.) the city that since the beginning of Islam lead the oppression and persecution of the Muslim converts.
(6) Since the polytheists differed in their relationship with the new religion after its victory, there was a need to differentiate between the malevolent enemies of Islam bent on destroying the Muslims and who did not observe their treaties with the Muslims, those who hated Islam but were willing to honor their treaties with Muslims, those who rejected Islam but peacefully co-existed with the Muslim community, etc. The aforementioned verse (9:5) was concerned with the most vehement opponents of the Islamic faith not by virtue of their refusal to be Muslims but by continually breaching their treaties with the Muslims and fighting them. Given that, their treatment is not equal, the complete verse says, “So when the sacred months have passed away, then fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and keep them under observation, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely God is Forgiving, Merciful.” Meaning: so when the grace period (4 months) is past, and if the other party insists on fighting Islam, then a state of war is inevitable. The struggle may take the form of killing, or capture and imprisonment, or just keeping an eye on these enemies to fend off their evil if they decide to launch an offensive against Muslims. The punishment should be fair and just and, thus, must be proportional to the crimes actually committed. Not only this, but the pagans can repent and accept Islam, as evident from the last part of (9:5), or desist from attacking Muslims and ask for protection, as evident from the next verse (9:6), “If one amongst the pagans ask you for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of God; and then escort him to where he can be secure.”
Understanding the verses’ historical context is crucial, not to confine them to their context, but for a proper comprehension of their implications. Moreover, as shown previously, the verse must be interpreted along with all the other verses explicating how a Muslim should deal with others, Muslim or non-Muslim, including verse (8:61), “And if they incline to peace, then incline to it and trust in God; surely He is the Hearing, the Knowing.”
The worst thing to do with the Quran is to approach it seeking confirmation for what one already believes in and turning a blind eye to any evidence that is inconsistent with his/her pre-conceived attitudes and biases. Anyone can find in the Quran whatever he/she wants to prove. Anyone can do the same thing with the Bible. The challenge, however, is to make a judgment only after a thorough and exhaustive investigation of all available Quranic evidence.
A Muslim may become selective and simply ignore some indispensable principles while working out what she or he should do in a given situation. Apart from self-indulgence, the socio-political context plays an important role in inducing this selectivity. A Muslim living where she or he finds Islam constantly reviled, the Prophet perpetually vituperated, and the Quran persistently misquoted may respond apologetically by declaring Islam as an “obviously” pacifist religion, ignoring anything in the Quran and the Prophetic traditions testifying to the contrary. A Muslim witnessing his wife being raped and his children slaughtered will very likely discard the well-established Islamic rules of engagement. The prevalent conditions are not a valid justification, but Muslims are humans after all, and humans — all humans — succumb to their overwhelming context. (Interestingly, the context was correctly and convincingly evoked in the U.S. media to understand the Abu Gharib prison abuses. When it comes to why some Muslims go to extremes, there is no context, only a culture of evil and fanaticism.)”
July 11th, 2007 at 7:43 am
I don’t care what others may call you, you’ll always be the golem to me, Isidor.
July 11th, 2007 at 7:48 am
John wrote: “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.”
I don’t know what the hell that means. It is much-debated and discussed. But I am quite confident whatever it means it does not refer to the destruction of families or promoting holy war.>>>>
Whatever its intent John — and yes, it appears at varience with other teachings of Jesus — it is undeniable that it proved to be prophetic. Much innocent blood has been shed in Jesus’ name. Much innocent Jewish blood has been shed over the centuries by Christians in Jeusus’ name. Did Jesus command this? No.
July 11th, 2007 at 7:51 am
John, I have a question. Do you know British author (former Catholic nun) Karen Armstrong?
http://www.amazon.com/Islam-History-Modern-Library-Chronicles/dp/081296618X/ref=pd_sim_b_1/103-2220455-0644600?ie=UTF8&qid=1184158252&sr=8-2
July 11th, 2007 at 8:07 am
I have not read her books. Have you? What do you think of them?
July 11th, 2007 at 8:35 am
I bought her book Jerusalem, One City Three Faiths. http://www.amazon.com/Jerusalem-One-City-Three-Faiths/dp/0679435964/ref=ed_oe_h/103-2220455-0644600?ie=UTF8&qid=1184160326&sr=1-2 You can buy a used copy at Amazon for a couple of dollars.
I just got an (unfortunately) “abridged” audio cassette of her book. Only four tapes, both sides. I’m just now getting to the last cassette. She is a good writer. Her book flows smoothly. Armstrong I believe is known to be an apologist for Islam and a critic of the state of Israel. Robert Spencer quotes her in his books; that is why I know she is considered to be an apologist.
Since at the end of cassette three was on the Ottoman empire, I’m guessing most of cassette four will be about the state of Israel, its birth and conflict with the Arabs. I’ve read enough of the concluding chapters of her book to know that she believes Israel, unlike most of Islam’s history, is not respecting other faiths in Israel. I do not accept this but this is her view. In fact she uses King David and Saladin as examples of leaders that respected other religious traditions after conquering the subject people.
Armstrong is very critical of violence done by Christians. Only a liberal Christian would take this stance. A fundamentalist would defend Christianity’s excesses. In chapter 11 on the prophet she wrote: “Islam’s birth had been violent but the Qur’anic ideal was harmony and unity. The very word Islam derives from the same root as salam (”peace”).
Actually I was surprised to read this confession that Islam’s birth had been violent. Can you think of any other world religion whose birth itself was violent? If King David had been chosen by God rather than Moses, we would have to conclude that Judaism’s birth had been violent because David was described as a man of bloodshed which is why he was not permitted to build the Temple. Jesus was not violent. Was the Buddha or Confucius?
July 11th, 2007 at 8:37 am
I should have written, you can buy a used copy at Amazon for a couple of dollars plus shipping which is close to $4.00. I paid $30.00 for my copy at Books A Million.
July 11th, 2007 at 9:19 am
“I don’t care what others may call you, you’ll always be the golem to me, Isidor.”
John:
Being insulted by you is perhaps one of the most profound acts of complement I can emagine. Like being insulted by Yasser Arafat’s brain tumor.
July 11th, 2007 at 10:35 am
Has anyone read or heard of the book “O Jerusalem” by Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre? Is it a good resource?
July 11th, 2007 at 11:49 am
“I don’t care what others may call you, you’ll always be the golem to me, Isidor.”
John, what do you mean by calling Isador a golem? A golem was an imaginary heroic figure. Isador is a living, breathing human being.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:00 pm
Steve:
I am a bit rusty on yiddish folklaw. My understanding of the word is that when faced with a crisis, the Jews prayed for divine assistance and a spirit was congered up that solved the instant problem. However, after helping solve the Jews problem, the spirit would not go away and eventually (in an O’Henry twist) did more damage then good. The Wikapedia def. was as posted above:
” . . can also also mean a “fool”, “silly”, or even “stupid”. . .”
So, we can be sure that John was meaning one of these.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1184063447373&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Jul. 11, 2007 9:33 | Updated Jul. 11, 2007 17:16
Death be not proud
By NATHAN BURSTEIN
The mothers of a suicide bomber and her Israeli victim go under the lens in ‘To Die in Jerusalem,’ a documentary premiering Wednesday at the Jerusalem Film Festival
It was an attack that stood out even during the deadliest month of the second intifada. Rachel Levy, a high school student with big eyes and dark hair, was running an errand for her mother at a Jerusalem supermarket when another teenager, an engaged Palestinian girl named Ayat al-Akhras, pushed past the store’s security guard and detonated an explosive device strapped to her chest, killing herself, the guard and Levy. Levy’s head remained intact, but forensic pathologists struggled to figure out which of the other body parts belonged to whom.
More than five years later, the gruesome bloodletting of that rainy afternoon serves as the starting point of To Die in Jerusalem, a documentary premiering Wednesday evening at the Jerusalem Film Festival.
Though the girls themselves shared much of the western media coverage in the days after the attack - Newsweek put the two side by side on its cover - the documentary focuses instead on their mothers, and opens six months after the bombing, when Abigail Levy, the Israeli girl’s mother, began a multiple-year campaign to meet Um Samir al-Akhras, the mother of her daughter’s killer.
The resulting film, scheduled for broadcast later this year on HBO, offers a rare, worthwhile and none too encouraging look at the family of the Palestinian “martyr,” an ambitious young woman with an interest in journalism and parents who, at least at times, speak with regret about their daughter’s death. “Had I known [about the impending attack], I would have stopped her, even with force,” Um Samir al-Akhras says.
In another film, Abigail Levy’s open-minded, counterintuitive impulse to reach out to the al-Akhrases would have dominated viewers’ attention. Like Lila Lipscomb, the mother of a dead U.S. soldier in Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, Levy gives the documentary its emotional core, and should have an impact even on those firmly opposed to the actions of her government. Viewers may feel their chests tighten up when Levy momentarily loses control late in the film.
But the stars of To Die in Jerusalem are inevitably members of the al-Akhras family, the closest the film can get to conveying the environment in which 17-year-old Ayat’s deadly final act took shape. “I always teach my children to love others,” says Abu Samir al-Akhras, the dead girl’s father.
But, of course, there’s a but.
“Unfortunately,” he continues, “occupation practices like killings, demolitions and imprisonments have changed the way [Palestinian] boys and girls think.”
And so we arrive at the key contradiction - and psychological insight - of To Die in Jerusalem, which features a mother and father simultaneously mourning and expressing pride over their daughter’s murderous end.
The al-Akhrases cannot admit the injustice of Rachel Levy’s murder, a Palestinian Christian minister tells Abigail Levy, because doing so would be to concede that their own daughter’s final act was, at the very least, morally problematic.
The al-Akhras family thus finds itself in the same trap as too many other Palestinians, those gripped by a logic that basically boils down to “anything goes, because we’re desperate/poor/suffering.” …(story continues)
July 11th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
If you want to know about Islam, the book to own or read now is “Islam: Past, Present, and Future” by the German theologian Hans Küng. It is about $50 and about five inches thick, so it looks exhaustively thorough. You can get a tall latte and sit down and read it at the coffee bar at Barnes & Noble for free, of course. Over my budget right now.
He traces the development of the guiding paradigms of Islam from origins to the present. We are now in the Postmodern phase.
Küng is now retired. He was Professor of Ecumentical Theology at Tübingen. You may or may not know he had battles royal with the present Pope when he was still Cardinal Ratzinger and was the Vatican’s enforcer of dogma. Küng was I believe Professor of Catholic Theology and was driven out. When I studied in Germany he was the professor of a friend of mine.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
John, what do you mean by calling Isador a golem?
Oh, I’m just giving him a hard time. A golem is kind of a yiddish troll and also a big lunk. I mean that in only the nicest way, you understand.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
” . . can also also mean a “fool”, “silly”, or even “stupid”. . .”
So, we can be sure that John was meaning one of these. >>>>
To be fair, I think John has it in for the Jews. Unless you are on the self-hating, far leftist, anti-Israel fringe. Is that a fair assessment John?
July 11th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
Much innocent blood has been shed in Jesus’ name. Much innocent Jewish blood has been shed over the centuries by Christians in Jeusus’ name. Did Jesus command this? No.
Absolutely correct. More blood has been spilled in the name of God than for any other reason, I’m sure. Yes undoubtely hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, children, and elderly were killed by Christians just in the 20th century. It is a horrific record, and one reason I’m a little “off” of organized religion of any kind at the moment.
In ancient times all religions can be said to have been “spread by the sword.” Every country had a religion. If the went to war with another and won, the conquered country got a new religion and people either converted or didn’t. Islam seems to have tolerated a number of different classes in the category of conquered peoples: those who became Muslims, those who opposed Islam actively, those who refused to convert but were willing to live peacefully, etc. Basically, those who did not convert paid an extra tax. The rule was: no forced conversions. Obviously, the Quran does not say “Kill the Infidel!” because once the battles were over they never did slaughter the people who didn’t want to convert. They just taxed them. They did not do ethnic cleansing, for example.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
And because of his method of “translating” them - cherry-picking translations while ignoring context - his presentation was inaccurate, subjective, tendentious, and completely dishonest.
Actually, it was worse than just cherry-picking between translations. He cherry-picked individual words and phrases from among translations. He left out words and phrases that didn’t sound blood-thirsty enough. He picked words that sounded more gruesome from other translations. He then stitched the whole verse together to create his own ersatz “translation” in the manner of someone who cuts out individual words and pastes them together to make a ransom note.
I took all his quotes from Surah 9 and then looked all of them up in his Appendix which lists the readings from each of the translations in parallel. It’s really dishonest what he did. He picks the words that are most gruesome or lurid or blood-thirsty sounding and discards anything else. He is very apt to quote only part of a verse or to stitch together parts of two adjacent verses. You don’t realize that’s what he’s doing if you just look at a verse in isolation. His mistake was in putting out so many verses and the translations so you can see just how he did it. It’s a fraud.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
To be fair, I think John has it in for the Jews. Unless you are on the self-hating, far leftist, anti-Israel fringe. Is that a fair assessment John?
Are you accusing me of being anti-Semitic?
As I said before, Steve, you have a nasty habit of putting words into people’s mouths. Grow up.
July 11th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
However, after helping solve the Jews problem, the spirit would not go away and eventually (in an O’Henry twist) did more damage then good.
Kind of a pain in the butt, in other words.
July 11th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Can you think of any other world religion whose birth itself was violent?
They all were violent. That as I said is because in the ancient world each country had what could be called a “state religion.” Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all three involved not only the working out of the religion but the establishment of states (geopolitical entities) based on those religions. And all three cases that involved warfare. Obviously in the Bible you have the tradition of the Conquest of Canaan. In Christian church history the underground sect was made the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire by Constantine. This actually happened because of his dream before a battle. But that was only the beginning. The Byzantine Empire spread through battles and conquered peoples became Christian as a result. Islam is just more of the same. Islam followed on the heels of centuries of Byzantine rule and Byzantine taxes and bureaucracy. For people in the Near East the Byzantine version of Christianity which was heavily infused with Greek philosophy and Greek rationalism probably went against their grain as much as the taxes. Historians say that many of the indigenous peoples who had been under Byzantine domination were more than ready to “return” (convert) to a Semitic version of monotheism (no more Trinity! no more son of God!) when the Arab armies pushed through establishing the Arab Empire.
July 11th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
John wrote: “Are you accusing me of being anti-Semitic?
As I said before, Steve, you have a nasty habit of putting words into people’s mouths. Grow up.”
In my humble opinion, Norman Finkelstein is on the self-hating, far leftist, anti-Israel fringe. You like Norman. Norman is an vicious anti-Semite in my opinion. You tell me.
What are you?
July 11th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
John wrote: “They all were violent. And all three cases that involved warfare. Obviously in the Bible you have the tradition of the Conquest of Canaan.”
Now wait a minute John. You are twisting things. Let’s begin with Judaism. I don’t want to defend Christianity for now. Let’s compare apples with apples. Let’s compare the Israelites, the Jews, with the Arabs who were the at each present the beginnings of these respective revelations; revelations to the Jews through Moses and to the Arabs through Muhammad.
At Sinai, did YHWH command Moses to spread the Torah by the sword amongst the diverse tribes of Israel? Later there were some rebellions against Moshe which YHWH Himself put down. But at Sinai: “All the people perceived the thunder and the lightning flashes and the sound of the trumpet and the mountain smoking; and when the people saw it, they trembled and stood at a distance. Then they said to Moses, “Speak to us yourself and we will listen; but let not God speak to us, or we will die.” Moses said to the people, “Do not be afraid; for God has come in order to test you, and in order that the fear of Him may remain with you, so that you may not sin.”
Islam was spread amongst the Arabs by the sword.
Thus Karen Armstrong wrote, “Islam’s birth had been violent.” Muhammad had to bring the various Arab tribes under his authority by the sword from the beginning.
July 11th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
Norman is an vicious anti-Semite in my opinion. You tell me. What are you?
You are entitled to your opinions. You are dead wrong about Norman Finkelstein. Your implication in my direction is highly offensive.
July 11th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
John, Jesus spread his heterodox version of Judaism by teaching and by miracles. Thus he recruited followers. Those Jew (mostly Jewish leaders) that rejected his new doctrine, were not brought into the new sect by the edge of the sword as Muhammad brought the Arabs into his new sect. Jesus willingly died for his teachings. Christianity was not conceived in violence at its inception — unlike Islam — was it?
July 11th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
You are dead wrong about Norman Finkelstein.>>>
I am wrong about Norman? He’s not an anti-Semite?
John, I’ve got his book. I’ve watched him on You tube. He is a vicious anti-Semite. If you were a Jew, you would see his self-hatred; his Jewish self-loathing. If I were a psychologist, maybe I could diagnose his disease, but I’m not. I’m a farmer.
July 11th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
At Sinai, did YHWH command Moses to spread the Torah by the sword amongst the diverse tribes of Israel? Later there were some rebellions against Moshe which YHWH Himself put down.
At Sinai? Sinai was only the barest beginning. Look back at my post. There were two phases. One was the working out of the religion. You can think of Sinai as the foundation for that. Then there was the establishment of a state (geopolitical entity) based on that religion. That was what came after Sinai, the part which Moses did not live to see, the conquest of the land and all the subsequent developments leading to the kingdom of David. The establishment of the state is the part where the violence came in, as it always did and always does. Judaism was absolutely no different in that regard from Christianity or Islam. The narratives of those events shows up in different ways in the holy books of the three religions. In the Torah, it appears that the narrative of conquest has largely been fabricated, that it may not have been nearly as violent as claimed. (The truth is that the Hebrews were more or less in the land from the beginning as “wandering Aramaeans” and the conquest narrative is actually the story of their slow settling down among people -”Canaanites”- that were ethnically, linguistically, and culturally indistinguishable from them). In the case of Christianity, that phase of the story was after the close of the New Testament in the 4th c. CE. In the Quran, the wars and violence form the background against which certain surahs are set.
July 11th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
Christianity was not conceived in violence at its inception — unlike Islam — was it?
Again, there are two phases. The development of the religion was when the teachings of Jesus got turned into the religion of Christianity, esp. through Paul. No violence. The second phase was when the underground sect became the state religion of the Roman Empire in 323 CE, through the conversion of the Emperor Constantine. Violence from then on.
July 11th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
Christian monasticism began in Egypt as a reaction to the religion being made into the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire). Deeply religious people felt that the church (as they knew it) had sold herself as a whore to the state and that the entire world was going into the toilet. So they headed out to the desert to live as hermits to shed themselves of the world which they saw as corrupt and to hasten the coming of the End of Days. A good part of what they were reacting to was the warfare and violence that inevitably accompanied / accompanies the linking up of religion with state. Their concern was for the religion, that this move was very, very bad for the religion, that the church hierarchy now had the power of the state to back it up. Some of us also feel it is very, very bad for the state. James Madison I think believed it was bad for both.
July 11th, 2007 at 3:49 pm
“it was worse than just cherry-picking between translations. . .”
That may be so or maybe you have (as usual) embellished. I am not the expert to say. However, to end this specific debate I say as follows:
Take the same exact (named) verses DIRECTLY from any one translation and what do you have? Kum-bi-ahh? I don’t think so. You still have a overtly violent diatribe. One day soon I will do this and post again. Better start thinking about your rationalizations now, so you can be ready.
July 11th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
JB:
As far as your arguments about “context”, you sound like a lawyer. And thats worse then a golum.
July 11th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
Steve:
Be careful with John. He will bate you and skillfully lick around the edges of tangible per-se A.S. If you accuse him, he will run to mitchell for relief.
A.S. people rarely acknoledge themselves as such. There is always the friend or two from the other tribe, to prove that the person is merely voicing reasonable opinions.
John (IMHO) does not hate Jews. He hates the falacious picture that he himself has contrived, out of his own emagination. He objects to people who do not exist in reality.
July 11th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
One day soon I will do this and post again. Better start thinking about your rationalizations now, so you can be ready.
If you like. I can’t respond to more than a few. However….what’s the point? Don’t all such verses boil down to saying something like Surah 9:5 is alleged to say, “Kill the Infidels”??? I believe that one verse about covers the lot, which is why I said it should end the debate. What more direct statement could there be than “Kill the Infidels”? If you can find one, put it up there and I’ll see what it says. As the man said, however, when the Muslims took over India the place was chock-full of “Idolaters” (Hindus). If the Quran had enjoined the Muslims to kill all the idolaters they could find wherever they could find them, they would have emptied the place out. It didn’t happen. Why not? Because the Quran doesn’t say that.
As far as your arguments about “context”, you sound like a lawyer. And thats worse then a golum
Ohmigosh. You just called me a Gollum. Speaking of which if you saw the movie (Lord of the Rings) didn’t you think Gollum looked a lot like James Carville? Anyway, I don’t mind your calling me golem or gollum; just don’t call me a lawyer. That’s hitting below the belt.
As to context. I’m sorry but I am not a fundamentalist. Fundamentalists don’t understand context or believe in it. They look at words and lift them up and run with them. That’s what I was getting at about the saying of Jesus “I have come to bring a sword.” A fundamentalist could take that and do Godknowswhat with it. Blow up the Federal Bldg. in Oklahoma City? But I am not a fundamentalist. You will never get me to let go of context. It’s my precioussssssssssss.
July 11th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
“just don’t call me a lawyer. That’s hitting below the belt.”
Yes, but its not on Mitchell’s list of capitol crimes.
July 11th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
OK call me a lawyer. Call me a cab. Just don’t call me late to dinner.
July 11th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
He objects to people who do not exist in reality.
John objects to policies; not to people. He believes the whole is more than the sum of the parts.
July 11th, 2007 at 10:50 pm
good reading:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_15_121/ai_n8702380/print
July 12th, 2007 at 12:53 am
“Real voice” in comment #5 “asked”: michelle, don’t you think that’s a human trait, not a european trait?
No. I absolutely do not think that.
I don’t appreciate the leading question, either. That’s not a question to me, not really. It is a statement masquerading as a question.
But pretending you were actually asking a question about what I think, as opposed to posing a rhetorical question in service to pushing your point, this is my answer:
Trying to make European cultural patterns and behaviors appear “universal” rather than culturally specific is one of the more common and pervasive tricks in the European cultural lexicon.
So. What I wrote is not about “native peoples” — don’t change the subject. What I wrote is about the very very culturally specific behaviors, assumptions, patterns and ways of life of Europe and its offspring. Most insiders in the European cultural system refuse to consider its specificity, and promote this idea that what is culturally European is the same as the universal “human.”
And for you and Isador (comment #6): About what I actually meant by ““Pro-Israel is not identical to Jewish” — I meant that there are Christian Zionists. And behind that, I was thinking about what John Baker wrote in comment #7. Thanks, John, for saying that so clearly. I totally agree, I have heard some very creepy things about the reasons behind Christian Zionism.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:11 am
Michelle:
I suppose I should be grateful for even small miracles. In the full scheme of things, its better to (once and a while) hear that groups other then Jews, Israelis or so called Jewish “Zionists” share the blame for the problems in the M.E., even though I may disagree with the underlying premise that the majority of blame is not to be assigned to the various Arab leaders.
Creepy or not creepy:
To me, it is all creepy. As made abundantly clear in my many above posts. The creepiest thing is that history is so totally subject to “interpretation” and rationalization and “being taken out of context” and at the end of the day, subject to revision at the whim of political and/or racially motivated forces.
Orwell:
“Whoever controls the past controls the present and whoever controls the present controls future.” (”Nineteen-eighty-four”)
The “Zionists” (and later Israelis) had merely beleived that the world would not change its rules as it went along. Of course, this was a profound miscalcualtion on many fronts. In order to change the rules at whim, the world needed to also morph its facts and re-chronical history.
Certain (very powerful) Christian groups believe that in the aftermath of the apocolypse, there will be no more Jews. The ones who survive, will convert to Christianity (as if they know what that is either).
But this is no more creepy then the Islamic version of “Judgement Day” which has a similar outcome, only with everyone converting to Islam.
The problem (IMHO) is that I also recognise that reality has multiple band-widths. It has the standard physical exact decimal calculations (e.g.: the atomic weight of cobalt equals exactly 11.7) and “reality” also shares its band-width with multiple side-bands (back-channels) of imaginary truth. Because humans are so powerful, the result of a mass-hypnosis can be a pseudo-reality which is more potent then the decimal (scientific) reality it displaces. Such was the case in Nazi Germany. The lie was the essential reality. Such slights-of-hand are not uncommon and find themselves revisited in various forms during day-to-day life. This is the inherent and ongoing danger of being seduced by a confortible (often shared though flawed) belief structure.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:16 am
“John objects to policies; not to people. He believes the whole is more than the sum of the parts”
Thats good. Were it accurate, it would be better.
One of the problems with blaming Islam (as I see it) is that by so doing, it removes personal responcibility from the follower. In the Munich Olympic stadium were literally 80,000 attendees, who all sig-heiled in unison at the appropriate moments. These people went home after the war as self-professed victoms.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:19 am
“Lebanese army pounds Islamic militants — Military denies reports of a final assault on Palestinian refugee camp”
“TRIPOLI, Lebanon - The Lebanese army pounded a Palestinian refugee camp with artillery fire on Thursday, but the military denied reports that the action was part of a final assault on the al-Qaida-inspired Islamic militants barricaded inside.
The firing began just before dawn and hours after more than 150 civilians fled on foot from the camp in northern Lebanon, as soldiers ringing the neighborhood moved up tanks and armored vehicles.
The army said two soldiers were killed Thursday, bringing the number of military dead to 88 since fighting began at the Nahr el-Bared camp on May 20. Earlier an armored personnel carrier was seen ferrying at least two wounded soldiers out of the camp.
Between five and 10 shells were slamming into the camp every minute. Thick black smoke billowed from deep inside the seaside camp and covered a large area above it. Heavy machine gun fire could be heard.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19722716/
Why no outcry from the all corners of the globe? Why no round condemnation in the United Nations??
Why no boycott on Lebanese made products???
Three words:
John Baker, Esq.
More precisely, the “John Baker experience”, which in its abstract format, is somewhat universal. To this mind-set, the above story is also the fault of the Israelis.
The fact that 90% of the residents of the “refugee camp” mentioned were born in Lebanon is of zero importance. It would therefore not matter if 20 generations of camp residents had their family burried in Lebanese soil. This is not aboutthe Lebanese, its about Israel.
July 12th, 2007 at 6:50 am
the underlying premise that the majority of blame is not to be assigned to the various Arab leaders.
There is plenty of blame, if you want to call it that, to go around in this sad story. Historians can sort that out and parcel it out as appropriate. For us it is better to speak of responsibility. All parties have responsibilities for the present and future.
the Islamic version of “Judgement Day” which has a similar outcome, only with everyone converting to Islam.
No, not to Islam; to the worship of God.
Surah 2:62
“Those who believe in this revelation, and those who follow the Jewish faith, and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and do righteous deeds, shall have their reward with their Lord; they have nothing to fear, nor shall they grieve.”
That is poles apart from the view of the Rapturists.
As to the situation in the refugee camps in Lebanon Why no boycott on Lebanese made products???
There is no symmetry between Lebanon and Israel. The difference is that there is no military occupation of forty years duration in Lebanon. There is in Israel. When there are violations of international humanitarian and human rights laws, there is an outcry. An international boycott did help bring down the regime in S. Africa, I’m told. Let’s stop palying the blame-game and instead let all parties start meeting their responsibilities under international law and begin to work out solutions to these wretched situations.
More precisely, the “John Baker experience”, which in its abstract format, is somewhat universal. To this mind-set, the above story is also the fault of the Israelis.
When it comes to me, you don’t know your butt from third base, Isidor. So get a new hobby. First comes labeling; then comes libeling. You are not my spokesman. You stick to explaining to us what Isidor Farash thinks, and I’ll tell you what I think.
July 12th, 2007 at 7:18 am
John Esq. wrote:
“When it comes to me, you don’t know your butt from third base, Isidor. So get a new hobby. First comes labeling; then comes libeling. You are not my spokesman. You stick to explaining to us what Isidor Farash thinks, and I’ll tell you what I think.”
Re:
Rebbe objects to policies; not to people. He believes the whole is more than the sum of the parts.
July 12th, 2007 at 7:20 am
John:
Do you mind if I do a biography of you? It won’t take very long, about 20 minutes.
July 12th, 2007 at 7:29 am
“There is no symmetry between Lebanon and Israel. The difference is that there is no military occupation of forty years duration in Lebanon.”
Bla..bla..bla..
Wonk…wonk…wonk…
(Just like popeye’s freakin-motha)
{Andrew Dice Clay — writing about John Baker}
The international humanitarian law permits those classified as “refugees” the choice of returning home or remaining put.
As said, 90% of these people were born in Lebanon. As also said (previous subject) guys like you will insist that Mexicans with no green cards who are in the USA for 10 minutes — be allowed to say permenantly, while Arabs born in Lebanon, going back 40 years have no human rights at all.
The Lebanon situation may not be an “occupation” but neither is the status of the West Bank and Gaza Arabs, prop-meister.
What the Lebanon situation IS is a perpetual internment of innocent people as animals.
At least in Israel, if there is a settlement between the parties, everyone gets to resume normal lives. In Lebanon, 100 years later, these people will still be in sub-human conditions.
More of your bullshit on a stick.
July 12th, 2007 at 8:10 am
I wrote: At Sinai, did YHWH command Moses to spread the Torah by the sword amongst the diverse tribes of Israel? Later there were some rebellions against Moshe which YHWH Himself put down.
John wrote: “At Sinai? Sinai was only the barest beginning. Look back at my post. There were two phases. One was the working out of the religion. You can think of Sinai as the foundation for that. Then there was the establishment of a state (geopolitical entity) based on that religion. That was what came after Sinai, the part which Moses did not live to see, the conquest of the land and all the subsequent developments leading to the kingdom of David. The establishment of the state is the part where the violence came in, as it always did and always does. Judaism was absolutely no different in that regard from Christianity or Islam.”
John, my point is that Moses did not take up the sword in order to unify the Israelite tribes into a cohesive unit; into a national commonwealth unified by covenant with YHWH. This was voluntary and consensual.
Exd 24:7 Then he took the book of the covenant and read it in the hearing of the people; and they said, “All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient!”
So Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people, and said, “Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words.”
The later conquering of Canaan was an altogether different thing. Needless to say, it was not done for the purpose of conversion, taxation and subjugation as was the case in Islamic conquests but for the purpose of an exclusively Jewish settlement in the land (as Muhammad sought throughout Arabia for the Arabs; thus he expelled all Christian and Jewish inhabitants from the Arabian peninsula), though Joshua and later Israelites failed to achieve this goal.
Islam by contrast was at war within itself. Muhammad had to unite the Arab tribes — in Medina, Mecca and other outlying Arabian towns and villages — by the edge of the sword. There is a vast difference here. This is why Armstong wrote that Islam was conceived in violence. She is not writing her about the later imperial conquests by Muhammad and his successors.
July 12th, 2007 at 8:52 am
The boycott of Israel is not about Israel’s treatment of Arabs in Israel, Isidore.
July 12th, 2007 at 9:07 am
Islam by contrast was at war within itself. Muhammad had to unite the Arab tribes — in Medina, Mecca and other outlying Arabian towns and villages — by the edge of the sword.
Is that accurate, Steve? I don’t believe so. My understanding is that during that phase the Muslim community was growing as people attached themselves to it of their own free choice, and that the violence that erupted was because that community was persecuted and attacked and expelled. If that narrative is accurate, then it is not fair to say that “Muhammad had to unite the Arab tribes…by the edge of the sword.” What he had to do was defend himself and his people. Again, you are ignoring the Quranic verse which says “There is no compulsion in religion” and the fact that was pointed out above, that without exception Islamic jurists have ruled that conversion by force was both invalid and a grievous sin. The early Muslim community fought battles with those who made themselves enemies of it, they made peace treaties afterward, and sometimes the people co-existed peacefully, and sometimes the conquered people ended up converting voluntarily. I’m sure there were exceptions, particularly under later regimes. But the notion of “conversion-or-death” is a fallacy, a putdown usually by Christians (who shouldn’t be talking, as I said).
July 12th, 2007 at 9:13 am
Steve:
“Exd 24:7 Then he took the book of the covenant and read it in the hearing of the people; and they said, “All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient!” ”
Who speaks that way? No one I ever met. This story is just as unlikely (IMHO) as the “Passions” story where the courtyard of Jews was alleged to have said:
“We don’t care if he {Jesus) has done no wrong — We want him crusified and let the guilt be on us and also on our children . . ”
“All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient!”
More likely the true reaction:
“Are you nuts? What do I get from this deal??”
July 12th, 2007 at 9:20 am
John:
There are Islamic terror leaders today (in 2007) who author and go on videos (including Bin Laden & Co.) clearly demanding that everyone convert to Islam or else.
What are you smoking? Can I get some?
July 12th, 2007 at 9:23 am
The military action in Afgh. is to irradicate the Taliban, who was only recognised by one other country on earth (Pakistan) blew up ancient Buddhist statues and shot women in the head (stadium style) for alledged adultery.
Men with too short of a beard were put in jail until their beard grew to sufficient legnth.
July 12th, 2007 at 9:25 am
This is why Armstong wrote that Islam was conceived in violence.
Rather than argue about whether that is accurate, or to what extent, I think it’s a lot better idea just to cease putting down other people’s religions. They all (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) have innocent blood on their hands. All of them. And shedding innocent blood is not what any of them are really about. Again, let’s get out of this blaming-mentality like children who have been caught fighting and all start acting like adults and deal with the responsibilities we each have before us.
I believe it is no accident that there are these three religions abd that we each have separate and different roles to play as children of Abraham, but that we are each here to help and enrich the other faith, and that without the others each is less than it should be. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. But with roles go responsibilities before God, reponsibilities we have all failed in grievously.
If you will go back and read the paper I posted above you will see what I am getting at vis-a-vis discourse between Jews Christians (and Muslims):
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_15_121/ai_n8702380/print
July 12th, 2007 at 9:36 am
John, Muhammad was driven out of Mecca. He sought refuge in Medina. When his Muslim army became strong enough, he returned to Mecca, made a ten year Hudna, then he violated his Hudna on a pretexts and defeated the Meccans. He did not unify these pagan Arab tribes —under the banner of Allah alone and his prophet — by the cogency of his message alone but by brute force.
Qur’an may say there is no compulsion in religion but it was not observed by the prophet of Islam.
July 12th, 2007 at 9:38 am
Isidore said,
There are Islamic terror leaders today (in 2007) who author and go on videos (including Bin Laden & Co.) clearly demanding that everyone convert to Islam or else. What are you smoking? Can I get some?
First of all, I was refuting your allegation that universal conversion to Islam was “the Islamic version of Judgement Day.” The demand of terrorists that everyone convert is not “the Islamic version of Judgement Day.” It’s simply the demand of terrorists.
Secondly, find a way to challenge what I say without accusing me of being on drugs or being in la-la-land or being crazy or filthy inside or Arafat’s brain tumor. I can put up with a certain amount of disrespect in good fun, but enough is enough. Get a new hobby.
July 12th, 2007 at 9:44 am
John: “I think it’s a lot better idea just to cease putting down other people’s religions. They all (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) have innocent blood on their hands. All of them.”
John, the point is not about putting down other people’s religions.
I is understanding the religious basis of this conflict in the Middle East. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the conflict between Israel and her neighbors is NOT about land.
This is a religious conflict, with deep and ancient roots; a conflict that will continue until God (if Isador will; I know Isador does not like mention of the deity) will one day establishes His kingdom. It’s only going to get worse, not better, in the years to come. We are “dar al harb” John. The territory of war.
July 12th, 2007 at 9:47 am
John:
In case you hadn’t noticed, you are my hobby.
“la-la-land” goes back several months. I do not recall refering to you as “crazy”. You stated that you nneded a hot shower to wash of the filth that I had posted. I replied that you could not wash it off as it was on the inside. (Out of context . . tut–tut).
Arafat’s brain tumor was likewise a retort to your insult.
“I don’t care what others may call you, you’ll always be the golem to me, Isidor.”
As far as smoking pot, maybe thats what you need.
Quit acting like a little school-girl.
July 12th, 2007 at 9:49 am
Muhammad was driven out of Mecca. He sought refuge in Medina. When his Muslim army became strong enough, he returned to Mecca, made a ten year Hudna, then he violated his Hudna on a pretexts and defeated the Meccans.
You narrative is prejudicial:
“When his army became strong enough” really means when his numbers grew strong through people voluntarily attaching themselves to the Muslim community.
“[He] defeated the Meccans” only means he defeated them. It does not mean that he then forced them to convert, which is what you assume or infer.
Here again is another account:
“But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.” One of the main concerns of Chapter (Surah) 9 of the Quran (a Surah is a collection of verses) was to delineate the strategies for dealing with the polytheists of the Arabian Peninsula after the Muslims, under the leadership of Prophet Muhammad, peacefully captured Mecca (In January, 630, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his followeres were joined by tribe after tribe along their way to Mecca. They entered Mecca without bloodshed and the Meccans, seeing the tide had turned, joined them.) the city that since the beginning of Islam lead the oppression and persecution of the Muslim converts.
(6) Since the polytheists differed in their relationship with the new religion after its victory, there was a need to differentiate between the malevolent enemies of Islam bent on destroying the Muslims and who did not observe their treaties with the Muslims, those who hated Islam but were willing to honor their treaties with Muslims, those who rejected Islam but peacefully co-existed with the Muslim community, etc. The aforementioned verse (9:5) was concerned with the most vehement opponents of the Islamic faith not by virtue of their refusal to be Muslims but by continually breaching their treaties with the Muslims and fighting them. Given that, their treatment is not equal, the complete verse says, “So when the sacred months have passed away, then fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and keep them under observation, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely God is Forgiving, Merciful.” Meaning: so when the grace period (4 months) is past, and if the other party insists on fighting Islam, then a state of war is inevitable. The struggle may take the form of killing, or capture and imprisonment, or just keeping an eye on these enemies to fend off their evil if they decide to launch an offensive against Muslims. The punishment should be fair and just and, thus, must be proportional to the crimes actually committed. Not only this, but the pagans can repent and accept Islam, as evident from the last part of (9:5), or desist from attacking Muslims and ask for protection, as evident from the next verse (9:6), “If one amongst the pagans ask you for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of God; and then escort him to where he can be secure.”
Some converted. Some did not. Stop putting down other people’s religions.
July 12th, 2007 at 9:51 am
As I said, I can put up with a certain amount of disrespect in good fun, but enough is enough. Get a new hobby.
July 12th, 2007 at 9:55 am
This is a religious conflict,
That view is a mistake which guarantees tragic consequences for all humanity. Anyone who claims it is a religious conflict clearly does not understand his own religion.I urge you to think again and not go that way. God help us all.
July 12th, 2007 at 10:20 am
I have just a few observations about the article Mitchell posted. First let me say, I am not a fan of AIPAC. In many ways, I believe AIPAC quite unintentionally harms Israel rather than help Israel. I am for Israel weaning herself as much as possible off of U.S. aid, beginning with economic aid and reducing military aid. I would like for Israel to be able to buy American-made weapons but to pay for them. I supported Netanyahu’s aborted attempt to wean Israel from American aid. Netanyahu failed in this regard.
Mitchell wrote: “Ongoing disputes over Israeli arms sales to China (and previously to India), the current Bush administration’s quiet non-response to Israeli requests for financial compensation for its Gaza “withdrawal” and its message to the Olmert government that it should not ask for funding for its “convergence plan” are additional examples. Pro-Israel lobbyists bitterly opposed many of these US moves, as they do any hint of US “pressure” on Israel to resolve its conflict with the Palestinians.”
I’ve not seen this bitter opposition to US pressure. I’m not sure about Oslo — I suspect AIPAC supported that failed agreement but — AIPAC was solidly behind Clinton pressure to work out an agreement between former Prime Minister Barak and Yasir Arafat. How I know this is because a letter to Bill Clinton was circulating within the House, authored by Colorado Congressman Joel Hefley, urging caution on such sensitive issues as the Golan Heights and Jerusalem (I believe). I know this because I called my Congressman’s office urging him to sign it and he did. I found out however that AIPAC was busy working the halls of Congress against the letter. At that time AIPAC had approached my brother who is an attorney to lobby our Congressman. I called and spoke to an AIPAC lobbyist by the name of Jonathan declaiming against the strong-arm tactics. Jonathan gave me the (I believe) typical AIPAC line that AIPAC supports the elected government in Jerusalem.
Then again, AIPAC got behind immoral Bush administration pressure seeking the expulsion of thousands of Jews from their homes, from Gaza and the northern West Bank. Again, how I know this is because either in the late spring or early summer of 2005, AIPAC held their annual convention in Washington and they absolutely refused to allow any speakers who were opposed to the Bush-Sharon “disengagement” plan.
Consequently, I do not see this bitter opposition to US pressure on Israel. It depends, I think, the nature and kind of the pressure. In the two instances I cited above, as a pro-Israel Jew, AIPAC did not represent my interests nor the interests of Israel and her security.
Mitchell: “It is also important that resolving the issues of Israeli occupation and Palestinian statelessness has never been an end in itself for Washington, but simply a means toward other policy goals. Peace initiatives are thus much more vulnerable to derailment by domestic forces.”
Why is Palestinian statelessness such a pressing Issue in Washington. There are scores of stateless peoples that receive no attention in Washington. What is with the statelessness of the Palestinians that it receives so much attention. Perhaps Palestinians need to be stateless. Has it ever occurred to folks that some peoples are not ables to conduct the affairs of statecraft? It seems to me, in the self-identified Palestinians we have such a people.
Michell: “Mearsheimer and Walt actually give the Bush administration too much credit, when they write: “It is now largely forgotten, but in the fall of 2001, and especially in the spring of 2002, the Bush administration tried to reduce anti-American sentiment in the Arab world and undermine support for al‑Qaeda, by halting Israel’s expansionist policies in the Occupied Territories and advocating the creation of a Palestinian state.” What they are describing was a short-lived revival of Clinton-era thinking, as personified by Secretary of State Colin Powell, after the September 11, 2001 attacks required the US to seek greater Arab cooperation in the “war on terror.” Prior to September 11, the Bush administration had scarcely budged from Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s position that any resumption of substantive Israeli-Palestinian talks would have to wait until there was utter “calm”—as defined by Israel—in Israel-Palestine.”
I have a copy of Craig Unger’s “House of Bush, House of Saud.” In his book, quoting from the Washington Post, then Crown Prince Abduallah threatened the Bush administration with a severing of ties between the two countries if Bush did not engage himself more actively in the conflict. This was in August 2001. Within hours Prince Bandar was on his way to Riyadh with a two page letter from Bush vowing he would work to establish a Palestinian (terror) state in the Holy Land. Of course we know, much to Sharon’s initial chagrin, Mr. Bush announced his “vision” only days after the September 2001 atrocities, provoking this initial response from Sharon:
“I call on the Western democracies and primarily the leader of the free world, the United States: Do not repeat the dreadful mistake of 1938 when enlightened European democracies decided to sacrifice Czechoslovakia for a convenient temporary solution. Do not try to appease the Arabs on our expense. This is unacceptable to us. Israel will not be Czechoslovakia. Israel will fight terrorism.”
Mitchell: “The Bush administration’s real interest in 2001 was the Persian Gulf, specifically Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. In their most explosive argument, Mearsheimer and Walt state that “the war [in Iraq] was due in large part to the Lobby’s influence, especially the neo-conservatives within it.” They then follow the trail of statements from neo-conservatives advocating the forcible removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime, and tie this advocacy to devotion to Israel.”
I think it is fair to say, Neoconservatives have not exercised good judgment in many instances. I was torn whether or not to support Bush’s war in Iraq which we now know was contemplated from the first few days of assuming office in January 2001. Bush had it in for Saddam for one reason or another and he was looking for a pretext and he got it on 9/11.
I did reluctantly support the war — Iraq, though not as much a threat as Saudi Arabia and Iran was nevertheless a terror-supporting nation. My nagging problem was Bush’s avowed aim of establishing a Palestinian terrorist state or regime in the Holy Land, thereby expelling thousands of Jews from their homes, their farms, synagogues and cemeteries. I was not sure how either quick victory or as it has turned out, a prolonged and bloody war in Iraq would affect Bush’s policies toward Israel. As it turned out, subsequent to the invasion Bush began putting more and more immoral pressure on the tiny Jewish state in order, it is supposed, to help build trust and confidence amongst our many Arab “friend” and “allies.”
“Destroy Israel and you will have lots of Arab friends,” is George W. Bush’s motto.
July 12th, 2007 at 11:26 am
John:
Don’t start shit.
Then, if you do start shit, don’t act like the victom that you aren’t.
How familiar . .
Its just like the Palestinian-Arabs.
July 12th, 2007 at 2:24 pm
Isidor in #77 wrote: Imaginary truth. Because humans are so powerful, the result of a mass-hypnosis can be a pseudo-reality which is more potent then the decimal (scientific) reality it displaces. Such was the case in Nazi Germany. The lie was the essential reality. Such slights-of-hand are not uncommon and find themselves revisited in various forms during day-to-day life. This is the inherent and ongoing danger of being seduced by a confortible (often shared though flawed) belief structure.
Isidor: I am, I think, familiar with this pattern you are describing. It is truly and deeply horrific, something that is active right now in the society I live in and it’s incredibly disorienting and ugly to me.
But I see what you are describing is a culturally specific thing. IMO, this is not a universal “human” pattern in the actual world we live in. It is a problem that comes from a very specific, deeply expansionistic and violent culture/behavior system that begins with a disconnection from the larger web/actual reality, and centers on power and control.
Deception/hypocrisy/lying isn’t just something that sometimes happens in this particular system. It is a core and basis for and of it. The Nazis are just an example of the larger pattern. They were not deviant from the larger European cultural pattern that has been in operation for 2000+ years.
I’ve heard the argument that an underlying reason European Christians have done such violence to European Jews through the centuries is that the European Jews as a group haven’t acted in agreement with the European Christians’ inherently expansionistic perspective — European Jews did not accept or enact this particular tenet of the European cultural system (example: political goals masquerading as religious ones: the ongoing use of Christianity-conversion attempts as a tool for imperialist domination — Jews don’t have that conversion-expansion ethos).
I find this an interesting perspective because it helps me to understand the situation today, in comparison. Now, by terrorizing European Jews for all those centuries, European Christianity has secured a form of collective agreement with that ethos through the complex dynamics of the State of Israel.
So Europe (Britain) “gives” some land it has stolen to Jews (mostly European-ancestry Jews in terms of power) and this situation forments violence. The fact that the supposed givers of this land are the same basic cultural people as the ones who have terrorized Jews for so long … well, no the focus is diverted. Now European Jews and Christians are supposedly in alliance, and it’s supposed to be Jews vs. Muslims. All that fear, all that terror, all that fighting back or not fighting back, all that horror and loss from dealing with various nations in Europe for centuries, all that stored-up collective energy is diverted.
But for Jews with ancestry in Europe: Who has been actually been terrorizing us most for centuries before the State of Israel was created? And now, who are we allied with via the State of Israel? Why would we agree to such a thing? Why are any of us so trusting of the peoples (collectively/culturally) who have been acting so violently and untrustworthy toward our peope for so many generations? They will protect us? They who have easily and violently harmed us over and over for centuries, this is who we ally with?
I feel that the Christian Zionists are a good example of where these supposed “allies” are in relation to us. The US (a culturally European nation) likes Israel because Israel’s European/violent actions in relation to land and expansionism etc serves its interest in domination. The Christian Zionist “allies” express the underlying devaluation of Jews as humans who should survive. I feel that if and when it becomes convenient for The US or the “Western” powers to offer Israel up as the front man/sacrifice for the evils of current imperialism, they will. Whatever they need or want to use Israel for, they will be absolutely willing to do, just as European nations have done for centuries but in a different scope and scale.
We don’t know who our actual enemies are, IMO. I feel that it will get very obvious very quickly at some point, the way that things go in cycles. Apparent acceptance gave way to violence against Jews in Europe over and over. To these European/Christian nations, we are things to be used, not actual allies. We are now participating fully in their game. As a result we have European “support.” And we also have serious responsibility for the violence and horror done by the State of Israel in our collective name.
But our collective participation will IMO not protect us from these supposed Western “allies” if it becomes expedient for them to do otherwise. We European-ancestry Jews are not and have never been fully human to European Christian nations. They will accept us conditionally, use us, terrorize us — whatever serves the larger culturally-specific purposes of power, control, domination, expansion.
July 12th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
Michelle:
In the middle of a jam-up right now and will answer in greater detail later. I used one example of mass hypnosis but did not intend to infer that it was exclusive.
Other examples include:
The Dow-Jones (people think that this is a sign of the health of the society — wrong)
Trans-fat adds some flavor that could not exist if the food was any bit healthier. — wrong.
Swiss “billboard” watches are actuallt worth as much as a car. - Wrong.
The false realities are endless. Some are more dangerous then others.
Having Fred Flinstone doing commericals for Winston Cigarettes (circa 1960) is a very dangerous false reality.
Blowing cash on a hype-watch is a less dangerous example.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
Michelle:
You wrote:
“The US (a culturally European nation) likes Israel because Israel’s European/violent actions in relation to land and expansionism etc serves its interest in domination.”
We are in obvious disagreement on this central component.
(IMHO) Jews do have a typical thought pattern (not absolute). Either one understands this pattern or one does not. People that say that no such generality exists — for sure — don’t have any understanding of it.
Israelis are both afraid of Arabs and at the same time, enjoy humiliating them.
Anyone who appreciates the subtleties of the Jewish keppie can not agree with the concept that Israelis are merely colonialists and land-usurpers.
Israelis can be self-absorbed and even megalomaniacal. They can also be infuriating. But they are rarely as accused, not in fact and not even in form. Had their culture been vindictive, they would have administered a much more severe pounding on their enemies then what they have done. They do not wish to steal anything from anyone else. They wish to win it through sometimes crafty methods, thereby leaving no physical “bruises” behind and at the same time, to help humiliate their opponent by showing how much more clever they are then he.
They did not start this war and they do not perpetuate it. It is not at all their style. They truly just wanted a small-little place where the two voices in their heads, can be left un-noticed by outsiders. One voice is their own and the other they believe to be God’s. They just can’t be sure which one is which.
This war with the Arabs is still another un needed distraction. One that never ends and will not improve by them giving everything that is being demanded. They know this. They have little hope for anyone who believes otherwise. At the end-of-the-day, the second voice in their heads can (sometimes) fairly be compared with intuition or even pre-cognition. This intuition is the result of being hunted down like animals for centuries. This in turn infuriates their attackers who can not accept that the Israelis have an actual mental advantage and thus the cycle of fear and hatred is inflamed.
But make no mistake. Its not about any land. Its not even about religion. Its about jealousy (by the Arabs) and to an extent greed (by the Israelis). The greed component is NOT the unfair acquisition of other people’s property and I do not frankly care how many U.N. votes say otherwise. Its because the Israelis should understand the advantage they hold and be more generous. Not less covetous but more generous. Give more of what belongs rightfully to them, not take less of other’s. Because, as I said, it is not in their nature to steal. How many Jews in US jails? About 12.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Isidor, it is not accurate to say that the Palestinians (in contrast to the Arab states) “started it.”
The war was in two phases, the first of which was a civil war. And the civil war itself had been preceded by a Jewish insurgent which the Irgun and Haganah conducted against the British occupation for three years prior to the outbreak of hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians. The Palestinians were not involved in the Jewish violence which preceded the civil war, to my knowledge. Correct me if I am wrong.
In any case, it was when the British left that fighting broke out between the Palestinians and the Jews. The Haganah and Irgun were like the insurgents in Iraq who are fighting the Coalition occupation there. When the Americans withdraw from Iraq, as the British withdrew from Palestine, who will be able to say, “The Shia started it” or “The Sunni started it”? It matters little, because it was and is a civil war.
So, is it fair to say the Palestinians “started it” when Arabs killed five Jews on 30, November 1947?
Or did Jews “start it” back in February of 1944 when the Irgun and LHI began blowing up British government offices and attempted to assassinate the high commissioner?
Now, there is no question but that the armies of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, the Arab states, the Arab League, were the aggressors after the civil war phase ended. If you want to say nobody should feel sorry for the Arab states because they have all these refugees on their hands, I would agree with you there. They were the aggressors in May, 1948, and nobody should feel sorry for them because of that.
But this is not the same thing as the Palestinian people. But the Palestinians were part of a civil war with you, a war which Israel arguably started itself in 1944. The civil war broke out in areas of mixed population prior to the time that the Arab states crossed the borders.
Israelis claim that the Palestinians were the attackers and that therefore no one should feel sorry for them if they were all dispossessed and became refugees. But it is not exactly the case that they were the attackers. And it is at least arguable that the civil war, the battle for control of Palestine, had been started by the Irgun and LHI in February of 1944, and that therefore the Israelis “started it.”
Now, there is no question but that the armies of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, the Arab states, the Arab League, were the aggressors after the civil war phase ended.
As far as I am concerned, the question of who “started it” is at this late date completely irrelevant, just part of an irresponsible, distracting, childish blame-game. Regardless who “started it” sixty years ago, which was before many of the current victims on both sides were even born, it is time now for all parties to accept the responsibilities before them for bringing this situation to an end.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:14 pm
“But the Palestinians were part of a civil war with you . .”
Who is “you”? I am not an Israeli. Do you mean by chance . . ‘you people’?
The violence between the proto-Israelis and the British was of no relationship to the Arabs, except that the British, through alliances with various Arab states and potentates, such as the Grand Mufti, became their (proxy) enforcers.
“As far as I am concerned, the question of who “started it” is at this late date completely irrelevant, just part of an irresponsible, distracting, childish blame-game.”
I suppose you would know.
But the history is not merely intended to cast blame for starting the conflict. It was asserted to reinforce the concept of who continues to perpetuate it. It was not said to rationalize or countinance retaliation, which would be somewhat childish (thanks for thinking of it).
Again, a M.E. “civil war” does not and could not include British as either CIVILians or locals.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Again, a M.E. “civil war” does not and could not include British as either CIVILians or locals.
By that twisted logic, Iraq cannot be in a state of civil war as long as American troops are there. Unfortunately, Iraq has been in a state of civil war for several years, perhaps since May, 2003 when Bush announced “active combat operations have ended.” As you know, all hell broke loose and we have been there ever since.
There is no question but that the violence of the Jewish insurgency was begun by the proto-Israelis and continued over a three-year period. This preceded the first phase of the 1948 war itself, which is agreed by all to have been a civil war. The actual war between Israel and the Arab States, the second phase of the war of 1948, began in May of 1948.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
John wrote: “The war was in two phases, the first of which was a civil war. And the civil war itself had been preceded by a Jewish insurgent which the Irgun and Haganah conducted against the British occupation for three years prior to the outbreak of hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians. The Palestinians were not involved in the Jewish violence which preceded the civil war, to my knowledge. Correct me if I am wrong.
In any case, it was when the British left that fighting broke out between the Palestinians and the Jews.”
When the British left, “fighting broke out.” I mean “sh-t happens.” Fighting broke out. It “happened.” Come on John, you can do better than “fighting broke out.” Who was the aggressor?
Let’s put things into context here. British were responsible for shutting off any escape of Jewish refugees to their only logical refuge from the murderous Nazis. That was Palestine John. British sunk ships filled with refugees, interred many on Cyprus and the island of Mauritius in squalid camps. Many more ships filled with desperate refugees were sent back by the British to Nazi occupied Europe where they were murdered. I hold England responsible for this.
You wrote the civil war itself had been preceded by a Jewish insurgent which the Irgun and Haganah conducted against the British occupation for three years prior to the outbreak of hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians.
You’ve got to me one of the most insensitive human beings I’ve yet met John.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
“Who is “you”? I am not an Israeli. Do you mean by chance . . ‘you people’?”
“You” meaning Israelis, proto-Israelis, IDF/Haganah, Israel-supporters, Jews, non-Arabs. Who did you think the War of 1948 was between? Arabs and…? I thought you were a supporter of Israel. May I not address you as such with a pronoun?
As far as “you people” goes, that was a slur you flung in my direction many long threads ago and refused to retract.
“It was not said to rationalize or countinance retaliation, which would be somewhat childish.”
Good. I’m glad you agree it’s childish. So maybe now you will stop saying “They started it.”
July 12th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
There is no question but that the violence of the Jewish insurgency was begun by the proto-Israelis and continued over a three-year period. This preceded the first phase of the 1948 war itself, which is agreed by all to have been a civil war. The actual war between Israel and the Arab States, the second phase of the war of 1948, began in May of 1948.>>>>
British were responsible for shutting off escape of Jewish refugees to their only willing refuge from the murderous Nazis. That was Palestine John. British sunk ships filled with refugees, interred many on Cyprus and the on island of Mauritius in squalid camps. Many more ships filled with desperate refugees were sent back by the British to Nazi occupied Europe where they were murdered. Some six million Jews were murdered. Many could have escaped murder by immigrating to Palestine but England would not permit it. Neither would England itself or America take an significant numbers of Jewish refugees. Great Britain said German Jews were enemy nationals. I hold England responsible for this.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
Steve, I’ll repeat. It was when the British left that fighting broke out between the Palestinians and the Jews.
July 12th, 2007 at 6:11 pm
Thursday, July 12, 2007
To: Friends & Supporters
From: Gary Bauer
CAIR Can’t Have It Both Ways
Yesterday, Ibrahim Hooper of the the Council on American Islamic Relations wrote an opinion piece for USA Today , reassuring all Americans that CAIR repudiates terrorism. Today, columnist Joel Mowbray takes apart CAIR’s claim and exposes the group’s “duplicitous ways.” While CAIR has in the past condemned terrorism generally, according to Mowbray, “Never in its history has CAIR specifically condemned Hamas or Hezbollah by name.” In a specific example, Mowbray notes how CAIR did condemn the 2002 Netanya Passover Massacre, a terrorist attack carried out by Hamas, but CAIR’s statement never mentioned the group Hamas, and noted only that the attack occurred “in the Middle East.” Is that CAIR’s way of refusing to recognize Israel’s right to exist? Perhaps so. Moreover, CAIR’s chairman, Parvez Ahmed, recently defended Hamas and Hezbollah by writing, “Unlike al Qaeda they do not embrace such violence as a matter of policy. These groups have not targeted people who are outside the land they view as occupied territories.”
Meanwhile, CAIR continues its full-throated campaign of condemnations against anyone who dares to suggest a link between Islam and terrorism. The most recent victim of CAIR’s crusade is commentator Cal Thomas. After the recent foiled terrorist plots in London and Glasgow, Thomas asked this question in a commentary on a Washington, D.C. radio station: “How much longer should we allow people from certain lands, with certain beliefs to come to Britain and America and build their mosques, teach hate, and plot to kill us?” Readers of this daily report know that I asked the same question during the recent debate on immigration “reform.” But to CAIR, such comments amount to “incitement” and “Islamophobia.”
But the facts are beyond dispute: Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations. The enemy that killed 3,000 Americans on 9/11; that has killed hundreds since in London, Madrid, Baghdad, Bali and Beslan; that routinely targets innocent Israelis with rockets and homicide bombings; and that has declared war on Western Civilization is driven by one overriding ideology – militant Islam. Attempts to deny it are delusional at best and, quite probably, deceitful.
If you are interested in receiving Mr. Bauer’s daily report by e-mail, please call 703-671-9700, visit SIGN UP FOR GARY BAUER’S “END OF DAY REPORT” or simply send a reply e-mail titled “Subscribe” and include your name and address. To be removed from Gary Bauer’s End of Day distribution list, please reply to this message with “Remove” in the subject line.
Please feel free to share this report with family and friends. As a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, donations to American Values are tax deductible for federal income tax purposes.
July 12th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
John wrote: Steve, I’ll repeat. It was when the British left that fighting broke out between the Palestinians and the Jews….. There is no question but that the violence of the Jewish insurgency was begun by the proto-Israelis and continued over a three-year period. This preceded the first phase of the 1948 war itself, which is agreed by all to have been a civil war. The actual war between Israel and the Arab States, the second phase of the war of 1948, began in May of 1948.>>>>
John, British were responsible for shutting off escape of Jewish refugees to their only refuge from the murderous Nazis. That was Palestine John. British sunk ships filled with refugees, interred many on Cyprus and the on island of Mauritius in squalid camps. Many more ships filled with desperate refugees were sent back by the British to Nazi occupied Europe where they were murdered.
Some six million Jews were murdered. Many could have escaped murder by immigrating to Palestine but England would not permit it. Neither would England itself or America take any significant numbers of Jewish refugees. Great Britain said German Jews were enemy nationals. I hold England responsible for this. Don’t you?
July 12th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
Isidor in comment 102: We are in obvious disagreement on this central component.
(IMHO) Jews do have a typical thought pattern (not absolute). Either one understands this pattern or one does not. People that say that no such generality exists — for sure — don’t have any understanding of it.
Israelis are both afraid of Arabs and at the same time, enjoy humiliating them.
Anyone who appreciates the subtleties of the Jewish keppie can not agree with the concept that Israelis are merely colonialists and land-usurpers.
Actually, I think I would agree with you on this, in terms of European/Ashkenazi Israeli Jews (you don’t specify but that is who I am talking about).
What you wrote above isn’t in contradiction to how I understand the situation. I was using words precisely in my comment — I was writing of the actions of the State of Israel. At that action level, it is about land, taking/holding/controlling land. That is the action.
But — the motivation is another thing. You are speaking above of the collective psychological level (or something like that — keppie-level).
And now that I am thinking about this, I realize that I don’t believe that Israel has totally culturally assimilated to the kind of expansionism that European Christian nations are into. I think European-ancestry Jews still don’t have that ethos, and that there is probably more of what you are talking about, wanting to be left alone.
But now, out of fear and as you say being hunted down for centuries (by Europeans in many cases), that translates into actual actions that functionally participate in the European Christian project, despite of ongoing resistance to full assimilation into the expansionist ethos.
As it turns out in practice, they didn’t need to convert us fully to their ethos. They got us in another way.
That combination of fear and sadism you describe above fits really well with what I understand of the background of this situation. To me it doesn’t contradict the actions of colonialism and land-usurpation; it is complex and there is a both-and situation. There is a collective psychological/political context here.
Where we disagree may be in where we feel that collective psychological combination comes from and who it is actually about way underneath. I saw a film a few months ago showing Israeli Jewish kids physically and verbally assaulting and throwing rocks at Palestinians. It hit me right in the gut to see them, these children, doing this, taking this role.
The looks on their (the Israeli Jewish kids) faces and in their bodies, the energy of their tones, it was like those kids were carrying the psychological baggage of European Jews going back for centuries and finally had a target and could be the aggressors inside that pain. I could almost feel the energy of their/our collective ancestors flowing out of what they were doing.
These were kids, it was so horrible, that twisted energy from them was way older than they are (and I’m not talking decades, I am talking multiple centuries). It was chilling to feel how those children were carrying that. We are part of a collective IMO, and I could practically feel them and their parents and ancestors, and the connection between their energy and my own ancestors.
That specific pain I saw, that specific twisted psychological energy, in my view has actual origins in Europe.
But as long as “it’s the Arabs” neither we Ashkenazi Jews nor Europe/the West has to face the realities and deep implications of our relationship and history. This evasion, not coincidentially in my view, serves the interests and domination goals of the West/European Christian nations, really really well.
July 12th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
I hold England responsible for this. Don’t you?
Yes and the United States also refused to allow shiploads of refugees to dock and disembark and they ended up back in Hamburg. I hold the United States responsible for that. I don’t understand your point though. Are you attempting to justify Igun/Haganah bombings against the British occupation 1944-1947? No need to do that. I won’t argue that. Now what?
July 12th, 2007 at 6:48 pm
Michelle,
“That specific pain I saw, that specific twisted psychological energy, in my view has actual origins in Europe.”
No question about it. Well-said. As a non-Jew I experience faint echoes of that energy on this blog from time to time.
I find myself in agreement with you with only a slight modification. I believe the European drive to dominate is technically pre-Christian in origin, a part of the Germanic warrior-ethos. One of the interesting things in Old English literature and Old German literature is in fact the clash of cultures between the Christian gospel and the Germanic warrior-ethos, as seen for example in the gospel-epic Heiland, a “politically-correct” retelling of the gospels to suit the Teutonic court audience. Anyway, you are quite correct in that the drive to dominate has long since been one which was European-Christian. Sadly.
July 12th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
corr: Heliand [Old Saxon]
July 12th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
John wrote: “I don’t understand your point though. Are you attempting to justify Igun/Haganah bombings against the British occupation 1944-1947?>>>
After the war, Truman established the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry to investigate the tragedy of the refugees and devise a solution to it. The Committee approved the American condition of the immediate acceptance of 100,000 displaced persons into Palestine.
The British again refused to allow immigration on that scale.
Murderers and sons of murders John. British are lower that low. Reprehensible human beings.
July 12th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
The British again refused to allow immigration on that scale.
Now that is understandable, at least. After the war. The war had dealt staggering blows to Britain. They were on their knees struggling to get up.
July 12th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
They were on their knees struggling to get up. >>>
To get up from what John? Their collaboration with the Nazis in the extermination of the Jews?
July 12th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
“To get up from what John? Their collaboration with the Nazis in the extermination of the Jews? “
Good grief, Steve.
July 12th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
Mitchell, AIPAC throws its support behind Palestinian terrorist group. Is it any wonder why AIPAC has no credibility? Notice: “In a memo sent out to congressional offices….”
Steve
http://www.forward.com/articles/11147/
Pro-Israel Lobby Throws Support Behind Fatah-Led Palestinian Cabinet
Washington Eyes Aid Increase as Hamas Brings Order Back to Gaza
Nathan Guttman | Wed. Jul 11, 2007
Washington - Pro-Israel lobbyists and legislators have become unexpected cheerleaders for the Palestinian leadership after the new Fatah-led Cabinet took action against Hamas.
In a memo sent out to congressional offices this week, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee commended the new Palestinian government for “taking important steps needed for peace” and for breaking ties with Hamas, which now rules Gaza…..
July 12th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
Good grief, Steve.
July 12th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
Hey John (comment #114),
1. I agree with you that the European dominance drive did not originate with Christianity. IMO it has multiple converging origins, even in addition to what you are saying about the Germanic warrior-ethos. But the marriage of existing strands with Christianity made the European cultural system stronger and is in practice deeply intertwined since that marriage.
2. You wrote: As a non-Jew I experience faint echoes of that energy on this blog from time to time.
Are you a white/European-ancestry non-Jew? If not please ignore this part. But if so, I would ask you to be very very thoughtful and self-critical about how you engage on these issues. There is a lot of room for white/European-ancestry non-Jews to perpetuate all sorts of problematic dynamics in these discussions.
For example, what I am speaking about here (the pain/psychological dynamics you reference) MAY be best discussed in arenas where no white/European-ancestry non-Jews are present — it’s that sensitive and complex. I might actually have been mistaken to discuss it so publicly for that reason, I don’t know. But I did, so I want to be clear. You may already know this but: What I wrote is not for any white/European-ancestry person to ever EVER use against a European-ancestry Jew for any purpose.
July 12th, 2007 at 8:50 pm
But the marriage of existing strands with Christianity made the European cultural system stronger and is in practice deeply intertwined since that marriage.
Absolutely.
what I am speaking about here (the pain/psychological dynamics you reference) MAY be best discussed in arenas where no white/European-ancestry non-Jews are present — it’s that sensitive and complex.
That is probably true. What you have said is really something that is for you to say but not for me to say. I hesitated to say that I agreed with you for fear of introducing some of those problematic dynamics. One of the things I am in process of learning through coming to this forum (which may not have been the wisest thing I ever did) is the extent to which my arguments and criticism of policy and history are seen through the prism of anti-Semitism and taken personally. Not being myself (white, central European, non-Jewish) part of a people who have ever been the targets of genocide nor centuries of persecution (possibly by my own ancestors!), I had not fully realized that would be the case. It’s been a learning experience. I understand where it’s coming from. I’m an old man. Some days my patience is thinner than others.
July 13th, 2007 at 5:46 am
http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/
July 13th, 2007 at 6:59 am
“Why can’t Jews and Palestinians make peace?”
By Bradley Burston
It may come as little surprise that efforts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict bear striking similarities to approaches to the treatment of mental illness…
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/879879.html
July 13th, 2007 at 7:32 am
John Esq. wrote:
“But the Palestinians were part of a civil war with you . .”
He then squirmed and rationalized:
““You” meaning Israelis, proto-Israelis, IDF/Haganah, Israel-supporters, Jews, non-Arabs.”
Psycho-babble.
What Palestinian-Arabs are part of any war, “civil” or otherwise with myself??
A- None, of course.
This slip is actually not uncommon from people who see the greater Israeli ‘menace’ as having its tenticles intertwinned within world culture and power centers. It is also a back-handed accusation that my loyalty is therefore in accord with a foreign power (perhaps at odds with my own nationality).
You should have just owned it and corrected it.
“By that twisted logic, Iraq cannot be in a state of civil war as long as American troops are there.”
More courtroom semantics. The violence you earlier referenced was between Jewish (proto-Israeli) combatants and British combatants who had taken control of a country which did not belong to them. They did this purely for self interest. (BTW: The early IRA leadership was heavily pro-Israel for exactly this reason).
In Iraq, the percentage of the violence directed at “Western” forces is NOT a “civil war”. The percentage directed by local Arabs at each other, or at Kurds IS a “Civil” unrest and war. You heaped the two together to confirm your earlier false assertion.
July 13th, 2007 at 8:20 am
Michelle:
You wrote:
” . . . That combination of fear and sadism you describe above . . ”
I did not use the term: “sadism” nor was that my meaning. My reference to Israelis finding some enjoyment in humiliating Arabs was intended to highlight a character flaw related to egotism.
You wrote:
” I saw a film a few months ago showing Israeli Jewish kids physically and verbally assaulting and throwing rocks at Palestinians. It hit me right in the gut to see them, these children, doing this, taking this role. ”
Such conduct is not to be excused and should be resisted. However, it is also not a cause for shock or surprize. Such conduct was just a matter of time. The Arab children are being indoctronated with false factual histories and being manipulated and recruted at a very early age to pledge their lives and souls to martyrdom.
I will come back a bit later with more.
July 13th, 2007 at 8:52 am
Warning! John will not appreciate this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzQFyhFNUtE
July 13th, 2007 at 9:20 am
What Palestinian-Arabs are part of any war, “civil” or otherwise with myself??
So say the history books; not just me.
“The REAL Islam Revealed”
The truly wonderful and delightful thing about convincing yourself that “it’s all about religion” and that the other religion is pure evil and that its adherents are demons and that [take a deep breath] God Almighty Hismself is on your side is that you never, ever, ever have to question your own moral purity, your own unfaithfulness to God, or heavenforbid your own evil. It’s really swell.
If the jihadists and the ultra-right-wing Jews (the jewhadists) succeed in turning this into a religious war, it’s guaranteed to keep the bloodshed going without cease for many, many years to come. Go read about the Thirty Years War which also began as a civil war and turned into a religious war. Go read about the conflict in Northern Ireland which was a religious war between two groups within Christianity forpetessake. You are being very foolish to continue spreading this stuff Steve. You are doing no one any good thereby, I promise you. What more can I say?
PS.
Considering this blog is under the auspices of Jewish Voices for Peace, I’m just curious when we will hear from some Jews who are for peace. Where are they? I have been flailing away at my keyboard for months. If no one else speaks up it’s pretty much Steve and Isidore and me, the Goyishe Voice for Peace.
July 13th, 2007 at 9:39 am
The truly wonderful and delightful thing about convincing yourself that “it’s all about religion” and that the other religion is pure evil and that its adherents are demons and that [take a deep breath] God Almighty Hismself is on your side is that you never, ever, ever have to question your own moral purity, your own unfaithfulness to God, or heavenforbid your own evil. It’s really swell. >>>>>
I don’t agree with the narrator that Islam is pure evil. There are indeed evil Muslims and there are good Muslims. I know there are good Muslim. I’ve seen them. I’ve read them. Some are now secular former Muslims however. I don’t know how Sheikh Palazzi interprets Islam but he is obviously a decent human being; a fine Muslim.
http://village.flashnet.it/users/fn034463/index.html
http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19444
What do you mean, I don’t question my own moral purity? Good grief. I probably about the most self-critical human being alive. I’m full of self-criticism and doubt about my ‘purity’. I have none.
>>>>
It is a religious war John. Wake up. Smell the coffee. Don’t be as they say in da-nile.
July 13th, 2007 at 9:43 am
“What Palestinian-Arabs are part of any war, “civil” or otherwise with myself??
So say the history books; not just me”
Is that so?
Find me one history book that says that Mr. Isidor Farash is in a state of war with any Arab entity.
The war I am in is the world’s false though common perception that every problem is the fault of the Jews.
July 13th, 2007 at 9:51 am
Civil war is a war between factions or regions of the same country.
Are you saying John, there is a civil war between Palestinian Arabs and Jews?
Jews and Arabs are not factions. We are entirely different peoples. We each have differing religions, cultures, mores, etc.
There is no civil war between Arabs and Jews. It’s outright warfare.
July 13th, 2007 at 9:57 am
The war I am in is the world’s false though common perception that every problem is the fault of the Jews.
From what I can tell you and Steve, though your view differ considerably, have one thing in common. You live in a binary world. The world as you seem to see it is made up of Jews and Anti-Semites. I would have to add that the latter group may include Jews who don’t agree with you, such as Norman Finkelstein. But that’pretty much how the world is divided up. Jews and Anti-Semites.
Now, since I am not a Jew, which category does that put me in? And that being the case, how will I be “heard” regardless the reasonableness of anything I may say (No one is completely unreasonable; not even me)? I keep hoping this will change.
July 13th, 2007 at 10:03 am
Are you saying John, there is a civil war between Palestinian Arabs and Jews?
The history books say that the Arab-Israeli war of 1948 began with a civil war between Palestinians and (proto-)Israelis. This was before the Egyptian tanks rolled across the
border in May of 1948.
First phase: civil war. No Arab states; only Palestinians.
Second phase: Arab invasion and war; May 1948.
What I am saying / proposing / suggesting is that that civil war was itself preceded by a three-year Jewish war of insurgency against the British (from 1944-1947), and that that should be considered the beginning of the conflict and that in that phase the Jews/proto-Israelis were the attackers. The Jewish insurgents attacked the British occupiers.
July 13th, 2007 at 10:10 am
Again, I don’t know how any historian can take the view that we call a war between two disparate peoples a civil war. Some argue that the “War Between the States” was not a civil war by definition. Radio talk show host and former attorney Neil Boortz takes this position. I’m not sure how he posits his argument.
Fighting between Palestinian Muslims and Israeli Jews is certainly not a civil war by any definition.
What historian called it or calls it a civil war? Can you think of any?
Norman Finkelstein? Is Finkelstein an historian by the way?
July 13th, 2007 at 10:19 am
John wrote: “From what I can tell you and Steve, though your view differ considerably, have one thing in common. You live in a binary world. The world as you seem to see it is made up of Jews and Anti-Semites. I would have to add that the latter group may include Jews who don’t agree with you, such as Norman Finkelstein. But that’s pretty much how the world is divided up. Jews and Anti-Semites.
Now, since I am not a Jew, which category does that put me in? And that being the case, how will I be “heard” regardless the reasonableness of anything I may say (No one is completely unreasonable; not even me)? I keep hoping this will change.>>>>>
John, I cannot speak for Isador. For me, you’ve summed it up pretty well, only I would say the world is made up of Jews and the enemies of the Jews and yes this would include Norman Finkelstein to the best of my knowledge in terms of what I have read thus far. My opinion might change as I read further.
What category would you be in. I’m not sure. If I were a betting man, my guess is in the final analysis you would join with my enemies. Maybe I am wrong. I am open to persuasion that you are a friend. I have my doubts however. As events and nations become more and more polarized in the years to come and as Israel becomes more and more isolated as we expect her to become, my guess is people will find it difficult, if not impossible, not to choose “on whose side am I on?”
July 13th, 2007 at 11:31 am
“Steve Klein Says:
Warning! John will not appreciate this video”
I watched the video. I find it a bit over the edge in the conclusions reached by the narrator.
There is a jihad in play but such has been the case for many years. This is nothing at all brand new.
What has changed is the percentage of Muslims who join the jihad. It used to be an insignificant percentage until 9-11, wherein it became obvious that no percentage could be considered “insignificant”.
As reported in the Wall Street Journal, in the weeks directly following 9-11, 75,000 German citizens converted to Islam. While the WSJ article did not specify, we should reasonably assume that a large majority of that 75k were white Christians. Some liked the idea of a “jihad” against the USA and others might have felt intimidated and wanted to quick be on the side who they believed would be victorious. Can’t be sure. In some examples, maybe the converts themselves remained unsure exactly why they converted.
Anyway, the Muslims have a big problem, which they are trying to solve (sometimes at our expense). Too many people (high birth-rates) and not enough resources. That is the root cause of the anger and unrest being depicted in the video. Sometimes, the solution translates into a design for world conquest. Of course, even world conquest would not solve their underlying problems. But for the time being, radical elements within the Muslim religious leadership sees such as its best (perhaps its only) viable solution.
That said, our leadership is nothing to brag about either. It is both dangerous and (often) treacherous. Our civil institutions are also quite arbitrary and defective. We don’t have the same level of problems as the Muslims because we don’t have their birth-rate or lack of resources. However, the best thing we could do (that is within our power) in order to to counter-act the growing ‘jihad’ is to clean our own house. But we do the OPPOSITE in reaction. In reaction to the growing civil unrest in the world, we have given a further “free-pass” to our politicians and our courts.
Essentially: “Now is not the time to quit smoking, when we have the added stress of dealing with our newly diagnosed case of lung-cancer”.
If we do not wake up to this (cluster-fu*k) reality, our trouble level will only exponentate..
July 13th, 2007 at 11:47 am
Binary reality:
Cute but incorrect.
There are two other categories:
Non-Jewish Jew lovers and a group who is truely neutral. Of course, that explanation does not suit John’s assertion that Steve and I are the actual biggots because we (in his mind) see anyone who is not one of us as one of the enemy.
Typical low-class propaganda technique.
And yes, some Jews are Jew-haters, just as some Blacks are ashamed of their race. Not rocket science.
July 13th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Too many people (high birth-rates) and not enough resources. That is the root cause of the anger and unrest being depicted in the video.>>>
If this is true, why did this not play out throughout world history. Why aren’t poor Hindus setting fires in India? There are many poverty sticken nations that are not killing, looting, raping and setting fires.
July 13th, 2007 at 11:51 am
Every baseball pitcher has a “go-to” pitch. this is the pitch they turn to when in a jam.
The sign of a propagandist is that their “go-to” pitch is to reverse the accusation made against their side.
July 13th, 2007 at 12:01 pm
exponentate.
Steve, we are talking about Palestinian-Arabs who have an average birth-rate of 6.5 children per family.
You point is not completely merit-less. Other groups, faced with similar problems might not act as violently. However, when faced with a acute shortage of recourses, the Germans appointed Hitler to fill their stomachs. Other groups, such as the British, do some dastardly acts without any shortage.
Of course, Buddhists would not be able to cite their religious scripture to support any violence. There are also fringe Jews who want to push the button yesterday and base their position on Hebrew scripture.
July 13th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
There are also fringe Jews who want to push the button yesterday and base their position on Hebrew scripture. >>>
Perhaps. Are they sending their children as suicide bombers? Aren’t there Muslims to be killed in the name of YHWH?
July 13th, 2007 at 12:25 pm
Isador, you’ve got to have an answer. What is Musharraf to do? You think all peoples are basically the same with or without the book most holy to Muslims. If Musharraf takes your viewpoint, Al Qaeda will have Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. What is Musharraf to do Isador?
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/EC8CA98F-CD24-48C3-A6F4-E79EC0D98D84.htm
Mosque protests erupt in Pakistan
Thousands have protested across Pakistan against a government raid on Islamabad’s Red Mosque that left more than 100 dead.
Police tightened security nationally on Friday in an effort to foil possible revenge attacks and seized three suspected suicide bombers and a car filled with explosives in the northwest town of Dera Ismail Khan.
More than 1,200 demonstrators chanted slogans denouncing General Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s president, after emerging from mosques following afternoon prayers in Karachi, the country’s largest city.
Syed Munawwar Hasan, a religious leader, told the crowd: “Musharraf is going an extra mile to implement the agenda of America in this part of the world.”
Jihad call
In the capital Islamabad, hundreds called for jihad and chanted “Musharraf is a killer” and “Glory be to the Red Mosque martyrs” at a rally organised by Pakistan’s Mutahida Majlis-e-Amal, an alliance of religious political parties….
July 13th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
Steve:
You may not be aware of this but before a few hundred years ago, there were few if any Muslims in India. Therefore, these Pakistanis where from Hindi families, if one goes back in time only a few hundred years. Today, one can see a significant disparity in earnings and more important, the regional Muslims generally have lower educations. This is not the fault of the Qur~an. It is part of a lifestyle which has certain priority values, detached from modernization. Remember that intellectuals were sent to concentration camps in WW2. The ‘tribal identity’ is often at exact odds with the evolution of the society.
These are people who (to some degree) are on the wrong path. The seminal question is:
Would there be an improvement in the lifestyle (or behavior) of these same people, were their religion to be different. Not necessarily. Hitler had his own twisted religion (part mystic, part folk). His people looked at him with glazed-over eyes. Any group who got in the way of the mass-hypnosis was killed, en-masse. Jews were definitely going because they met two targeted criteria:
They were Jews and intellectuals both.
In 2007, the conquesidors have changed but the underlying principles remain.
Again, as both Jews and intellectuals, our tribe has some big trouble.
July 13th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
Have a look at this link:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=468172&in_page_id=1811&ct=5
The big guy looks passible for an Ashkanaze Jew (without the Asian hairdoo) while the little one looks like a sephardic.
July 13th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Again, I don’t know how any historian can take the view that we call a war between two disparate peoples a civil war.
Right. In the South, some people call the Civil War, “The War of Northern Aggression.” Obviously, “civil war” is not a neutral term. It is politically-loaded.
It is called a civil war, because the conflict was still within the Mandate of Palestine. This was before the declaration of the State of Israel.
The term is used by Benny Morris and I think Ilan Pappé. Karsh calls it a conflict. You can read about it here on wiki:
“1948 Civil War in the British Mandate of Palestine”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947-48_Palestinian_Civil_War
July 13th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
“this is the pitch they turn to when in a jam.”
Well once again you attribute evil motives to me when there are none, which makes my point.
This pitcher is not in a jam; his arm is just tired and he’s ready for the bullpen to start warming up.
I am just telling you that I am pretty much convinced that just about everything I wanted to say really needs to be said to you guys by a Jew rather than by a goyishe mensch, at least not this one.
July 13th, 2007 at 4:16 pm
John wrote: “Right. In the South, some people call the Civil War, “The War of Northern Aggression.” Obviously, “civil war” is not a neutral term. It is politically-loaded.
It is called a civil war, because the conflict was still within the Mandate of Palestine. This was before the declaration of the State of Israel.
The term is used by Benny Morris and I think Ilan Pappé. Karsh calls it a conflict. You can read about it here on wiki”>>>>
John,
I generally like and quote Wikipedia. I read part of this work and I will try to read the rest later. I’ve got a fundamental disagreement with Wikipedia on this. A civil war is a war between disparate factions within a nation as I believe was the case in 1860- 1865 here in the United States.
Jews and Arabs are differing (disparate) nations. If you wish, you can say, technically they were both called “Palestinians” because the land before Israel’s Declaration of Independence was called “Palestine.” However these two peoples were and still are entirely different and distinct nations. NO civil war between distinct nations.
Steve
July 13th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
John, in comment #123 you wrote: s the extent to which my arguments and criticism of policy and history are seen through the prism of anti-Semitism and taken personally. Not being myself (white, central European, non-Jewish) part of a people who have ever been the targets of genocide nor centuries of persecution (possibly by my own ancestors!), I had not fully realized that would be the case. It’s been a learning experience. I understand where it’s coming from. I’m an old man. Some days my patience is thinner than others.
Okay.
But.
It’s not only how things you say “are taken” or the prism others “see through.” The problem with that perspective is that it implicitly locates the problem with the people who have been targets, and questions our sense of reality at some level, while still not questioning your own role in discussions like this.
It’s not so much that we — in this case, European-ancestry Jews — take things “personally” (that is a trivializing thing to say) or see everything through some lens that isn’t real or good enough. Instead, it’s that this stuff is real and visceral to us in a way that it is often not for someone in your location.
And that situation should cause you to self-critically question why and how you participate in these discussions and what your actual responsibilities are in stuff like this.
In #133 you wrote: From what I can tell you [Isidor] and Steve, though your view differ considerably, have one thing in common. You live in a binary world. The world as you seem to see it is made up of Jews and Anti-Semites. I would have to add that the latter group may include Jews who don’t agree with you, such as Norman Finkelstein. But that’pretty much how the world is divided up. Jews and Anti-Semites.
Now, since I am not a Jew, which category does that put me in? And that being the case, how will I be “heard” regardless the reasonableness of anything I may say (No one is completely unreasonable; not even me)? I keep hoping this will change.
Here you are criticizing Steve and Isidor’s view of reality, setting yourself up as competent to judge that view as problematic, implying that you in your unoppressed infinite wisdom are more “advanced” (which is probably just a sign that you aren’t as viscerally involved which means that actualy there is a lot you probably don’t understand) and showing your over-concern with whether they perceive you as anti-Semitic.
You are not questioning yourself, not being thoughtful, not criticizing your own perspective of reality — but rather setting yourself above and saying that the real problem is how these Jewish people “see” you.
You are also assuming that you have a right to be “heard” in a discussion like this. Sure, blogs are open and anyone can come along and participate.
But if you are telling the truth in comment #123 when you say you are learning — John, this is a place you have a lot of learning to do. Ask yourself why you have so much energy to debate this stuff with Jewish people. What twistedness in you does it serve to name yourself as a Goyishe for Peace (comment #129) and do verbal battle with Jews in this manner like you have been doing on this blog?
You and your people have your own collective psychological twisted-ness to deal with. Your comment from #133 I quoted above, and the Goyishe for Peace thing shows a part of that in operation.
IMO if you are telling the truth about learning: You need to get critical of yourself on this stuff if you are serious about learning and questioning how and why you participate in this kind of discussion.
This self-righteous self-identifying as one of the good guys, and the energy you bring to argue with and judge Jews about this stuff, this is part of the larger pattern of your people. White non-Jews Christian/European ancestry people very often participate in this issue (and others where Jews are involved like Jewish-Black dynamics) as if you are implicitly above it and just plain know best. In this twistedness, we are partial and particular, and you are above that kind of thing and can know the truth.
And so this pattern often includes the unoppressed person trying to persuade people from one of the other groups on “the truth” that s/he assumes to know best.
This pattern of behavior feeds a twistedness that allows your people to evade the visceral reality of your own historical and current implication and real responsibility for this situation. It feeds a false ego of “I am good” that is right in line with the lies that your people have been forcing on others for centuries while doing incredibly heinous violence.
And by the way, John, in that sweeping defining of the landscape of yourself as the Benevolent Goy For Peace amidst these two Jews you have judged as wrong and flawed in perception of reality — you forgot to acknowledge my existence in this discussion. Do you in your unoppressed judgmental wisdom choose not to assess me as a “real” Jew for Peace or have you judged my participation as not meeting some criteria you in your infinite white-male-Goy wisdom have set up?
But beyond that, the deeper issue is, why would you sit in judgment like this, defining the landscape and assuming that it is yours to determine what Jews should be doing in relation to this blog? Again, it’s that pattern of your own people.
Yes, you have a lot of learning to do.
Ask yourself why you have so much energy to argue with Jews about this stuff on this blog. Ask yourself what other ways you could use that energy, given the actual reality of your people’s collective actions currently and historically. Try to get a better understanding of your actual responsibilities in relation to your own people’s role in creating and perpetuating this situation?
IMO, given the reality of your own people’s past and ongoing oppression of us and how you are enacting some of the twisted dynamics of your own people in how you are engaging — arguing with Jews the way you are here isn’t the best use of the energy you are putting into it.
July 13th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Isidor in #127: Okay, I hear you on the clarification of what you meant and sorry to put a word into it that you didn’t mean or use (sadism). That is my word and fits with what I was saying but not with what you were saying.
Yes. We do see/feel this very differently.
Heh. What a shock! Jews … disagreeing with each other??!!!
Sometimes I somewhat disagree with myself on things. But not on my current perspective on the State of Isreal and what kind of anti-Semitism is really in play here. It has been many many years and a lot of reflection to get to this understanding I am currently holding (eg what I have said in various comments here).
There is always room for learning, always, but this is one of those areas where I feel like my footing is relatively firm because the way I got to it and how hard the fight was inside myself and how deep it went. So I’m sorry, but I think disagreement is where you and I stand in relation to each other on some basic stuff (which you have pointed out and I didn’t get at first) and I don’t see a whole lot of room for movement at this point.
July 13th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Michelle:
That’s OK. After reading how you manhandled John, I am quite sure and appreciative of your sincerity.
No one else could have said it better, more intelligently and with greater objectivity.
While we disagree on some core components, I have respect for you.
Perhaps in time you will come to better understand the extremely bizzare life I have had and accordingly, having escaped physical and esoteric death numerous times, my perspective is hard to duplicate from the now living.
Have a nice weekend.
July 13th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
Thank you for you comments, Michelle. I’ll respond below.
Instead, it’s that this stuff is real and visceral to us in a way that it is often not for someone in your location.
Exactly so. I did not mean to claim otherwise.
why and how you participate in these discussions and what your actual responsibilities are in stuff like this.
Again, this is what I was trying to say.
Here you are criticizing Steve and Isidor’s view of reality, setting yourself up as competent to judge that view as problematic, implying that you in your unoppressed infinite wisdom are more “advanced” (which is probably just a sign that you aren’t as viscerally involved which means that actualy there is a lot you probably don’t understand) and showing your over-concern with whether they perceive you as anti-Semitic.
You are not questioning yourself, not being thoughtful, not criticizing your own perspective of reality — but rather setting yourself above and saying that the real problem is how these Jewish people “see” you.
You are also assuming that you have a right to be “heard” in a discussion like this.
My concern was simply that I wanted to be heard, didn’t think I was, and that I had begun to conclude (slow on the uptake) that it probably wasn’t possible to be heard. I mean no moral judgement against anyone for that. Steve and Isidor’s view of reality is problematic only to me and only in the sense that I wanted to be heard and after several months trying I don’t see that happening. I have begun to understand it (slow on the uptake) and I regret it. I’m not setting myself above anyone. It’s just the way things are.
Ask yourself why you have so much energy to debate this stuff with Jewish people. What twistedness in you does it serve to name yourself as a Goyishe for Peace (comment #129) and do verbal battle with Jews in this manner like you have been doing on this blog?
The GVP was meant to be self-deprecating humor and reflects a growing consciousness that - as you have been saying - that other voices than mine are more appropriate here. I am out of place.
Do you in your unoppressed judgmental wisdom choose not to assess me as a “real” Jew for Peace or have you judged my participation as not meeting some criteria you in your infinite white-male-Goy wisdom have set up?
Actually, I was/am hoping that you are the relief pitcher who will step in as I leave the game.
why would you sit in judgment like this, defining the landscape and assuming that it is yours to determine what Jews should be doing in relation to this blog? Again, it’s that pattern of your own people.
Again, I was expressing the hope - not an ought to - that someone other than I - a white, male, non-Jew - would login and counter the arguments of Steve and Isidor.
Ask yourself why you have so much energy to argue with Jews about this stuff on this blog. Ask yourself what other ways you could use that energy, given the actual reality of your people’s collective actions currently and historically. Try to get a better understanding of your actual responsibilities in relation to your own people’s role in creating and perpetuating this situation?
IMO, given the reality of your own people’s past and ongoing oppression of us and how you are enacting some of the twisted dynamics of your own people in how you are engaging — arguing with Jews the way you are here isn’t the best use of the energy you are putting into it.
I am convinced that you are correct. I came in sincerity. I have argued vociferously but have at least attempted to argue respectfully. I completely failed to consider how my words would be taken given my own people’s role as oppressors and presecutors of your people. And as I said, it is completely understandable that they would be taken that way. It had simply not dawned on me (slow on the uptake). I came because I thought I might have some light to shed on the discussion from years of reading on the subject. Wrong forum for me. No one’s fault but my own. I wish everyone well, but do have to agree with what you put very nicely, this isn’t the best use of the energy I’ve been putting into it. Shalom.
July 13th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Further clarification
…showing your over-concern with whether they perceive you as anti-Semitic.
Go back to Isidor’s comments in #71. It may help you to understand something. Isidor and I have our own history here, which he alludes to there.
He warns Steve that I will “run to Mitchell for relief.” That was because many threads back Isidor had suggested in anger that I “go out and paint a synagogue.” (I complained to Mitchell. We were both reprimanded by Mitchell for being abusive, because in another context I had told Isidor I had seen little evidence he was “playing with a full deck”).
Anyway, I was deeply offended and hurt by his remark and will admit to being sensitized (over-sensitized?) by the experience. I also tried to take Mitchell’s cautions to heart. Anyway, that’s the deep background of my comment about a binary world-view.
July 14th, 2007 at 6:24 am
John wrote: “My concern was simply that I wanted to be heard, didn’t think I was, and that I had begun to conclude that it probably wasn’t possible to be heard.”
John, I heard you. We fundamentally disagree but then I did not expect to engage on a Jewish Voice for Peace blog without at least some disagreement. I have joined Internet lists and forums for this very reason; to be intellectually challenged to go back to my sources and to investigate new sources in order to learn. This area of world politics, the Middle East, is exhaustive in scope.
Have I been exasperated at times? Yes. But then so have you by my obstinacy. Because of you, I have purchased two books — “Image and Reality” and “Palestine, Peace Not Apartheid.” But for your encouragement, I might never have thought of buying these two books.
July 14th, 2007 at 6:47 am
Thank you, Steve. You challenged me too, which is good. Best wishes.
July 14th, 2007 at 8:16 am
On page xv of Jimmy Carter’s “Palestine, Peace Not Apartheid,” Mr. Carter writes (and I paraphrase — substituting Israel for Cain and “Abdel” for Abel as is suggested throughout the book):
“The Bible says that when the first blood was shed among His children, God asked Israel (Cain), the slayer, ‘Where is Abdel your brother’? And he said, ‘I know not. Am I my brother’s keeper’? And the Lord said, ‘What hast thou done? The voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto Me from the ground. And now art thou cursed….’
“The blood of Abraham, God’s father of the chosen, still flows in the veins of Arab, Jew and Christian, and too much of it has been spilled in grasping for the inheritance of the revered patriarch in the Middle East. The spilled blood in the Holy Land still cries out to God — an anguished cry for peace.”
— from the Blood of Abraham by Jimmy Carter
July 14th, 2007 at 8:32 am
Quoting Don Imus:
“He wasn’t SICK . . He just liked to expose himself in front of people.”
July 14th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
Michelle #150
“And that situation should cause you to self-critically question why and how you participate in these discussions and what your actual responsibilities are in stuff like this.”
I’ve been doing a lot of that self-questioning the past 24 hrs. I’m beginning to answer some of the questions you raised for me. I agreed with much of what you said in #150 because I had come to the conclusion myself that I was simply in the wrong forum. But you have sat in judgement of me and I think you have seriously mischaracterized me / my motives and so I would like to make some further comments.
First, let me address the issue of having “so much energy to argue with Jews about this stuff on this blog.” The real question for me is why I have so much energy to argue about this stuff, period. I spent the better part of a year arguing the same “stuff” on other blogs and probably more forcefully, less respectfully, mostly with non-Jews. I am passionate about these issues. I am highly opinionated and really like to argue. That is a character flaw. Guilty. I feel everyone is entitled to my opinion [joke]. So, why argue with Jews? I have enjoyed arguing here as opposed to the other places because even though we disagreed strongly, I felt we were in the same moral frame-of-reference, operating with the same underlying moral assumptions, in a way that I did not feel elsewhere. I admire Jewish people. I also have had a deep personal interest in Judaism and the Hebrew Bible and Talmud and have taught Hebrew at the university level. No big deal, just more connections to explain why I came. I never claimed to be in sole possession of “the truth,” as you allege; I did try to tell “the truth” as I knew it. I tried to be respectful, argue facts / policies; not personalities. I wanted to contribute to the discussion and find out what others thought about my ideas.
“It’s not only how things you say “are taken” or the prism others “see through.” The problem with that perspective is that it implicitly locates the problem with the people who have been targets, and questions our sense of reality at some level, while still not questioning your own role in discussions like this.
It’s not so much that we — in this case, European-ancestry Jews — take things “personally” (that is a trivializing thing to say) or see everything through some lens that isn’t real or good enough.”
I should not have used the words “taken personally.” Poor choice of words. I was talking about something specific going back through this and previous threads with Steve and Isidor. And here we are to the point of my growing realization that I am in the wrong forum. What I was complaining about there was that we would be discussing historical facts or quotations and then their responses to me would so often include personal or ad hominem attacks on me. That from my perspective was what was “problematic” about their binary view of reality. I did not sit in judgement of it as a superior moral being. I was just tired of it, of being unable to discuss anything with Steve or Isidor without being personally attacked. I am not talking about teasing, but the frequent suggestions that I might be anti-Semitic. I may be “unoppressed” but I am not an anti-Semite. I’m not “over-concerned” about being perceived as such; I’m just tired of it. Now what I concluded was that this was not in fact their fault, but mine. Because of my ethnic background, this is not the appropriate place for me to be arguing “this stuff.” I did not claim “a right to be heard” but naturally anyone who speaks wants to be heard, and I finally realized that it was not possible for my arguments to be heard without the additional baggage I bring to the forum as a white, European, non-Jews. And so that was what was problematic to me about their world-view, which of course my own people helped create. So yes there was a problem with how these Jewish people see me; not a moral fault or a twistedness however, and a problem in which I had complicity by way of background. But it was a problem for me viscerally in that I kept being attacked and not seeing it coming (slow on the uptake). I’ve gone on at great length not because I wish to complain or whine but to clarify for you the dynamics of what you were commenting on, which I believe you misjudged.
Now here’s a point at which I have somw questions for your own thoughtful reflection and self-criticism.
“White non-Jews Christian/European ancestry people very often participate in this issue (and others where Jews are involved like Jewish-Black dynamics) as if you are implicitly above it and just plain know best. In this twistedness, we are partial and particular, and you are above that kind of thing and can know the truth.
And so this pattern often includes the unoppressed person trying to persuade people from one of the other groups on “the truth” that s/he assumes to know best.
This pattern of behavior feeds a twistedness that allows your people to evade the visceral reality of your own historical and current implication and real responsibility for this situation. It feeds a false ego of “I am good” that is right in line with the lies that your people have been forcing on others for centuries while doing incredibly heinous violence.”
How do we get to a place where I, an unoppressed person, can speak with you, an oppressed person, about this stuff? Given your analysis here, is that even possible in the world as we know it? In particular, may a white, European, non-Jew speak to a Jews about the misrepresentation of historical facts regarding Islam or the origin of the Palestinian refugee crisis or Jimmy Carter’s latest book or Norman Finkelstein, which is mostly what I have been doing here, or must this simply come from another Jew?
Have you not judged white, European, non-Jews as “partial and particular,” as beneath the truth which you claim to know, and, by virtue of being “unoppressed,” not as “good” as you?
I can understand the argument of collective and historical guilt and concur with you on that with respect to my own ethnicity to a point. I have no idea of any particulars about my ancestors, but beyond that I am an individual with my own history quite apart from being a member of an ethnic group with its history. The danger of relating to people in terms of the ethnicities the “represent” is of course a kind of stereotyping in itself, which is where the problem started to begin with. Perhaps I am too viscerally uninvolved to point that out, but as one who has just been judged, stereotyped, and labeled, I am not exactly viscerally uninvolved. I do agree that I do have actual responsibilities with my own people that would more appropriately employ my energies.
“Goyishe for Peace” was a very lame / inappropriate joke, but it was not a self-righteous claim to be “a good guy.” What I was pointing out was simply the irony of being a gentile and speaking for peace on JVP, while Steve and Isidor, both Jews, were forever arguing in favor of continued hostilities. They are worthy “opponents” - Actually I hold them both in some affection, which I guess makes me a little twisted - and I hope you will continue to participate.
Sorry for all this bandwidth, Michelle. I did think your comments deserved further response. Best wishes.
July 15th, 2007 at 10:41 am
” . . .What I was complaining about there was that we would be discussing historical facts or quotations and then their responses to me would so often include personal or ad hominem attacks on me. . . ”
More dreaming.
On rare occasion, I would levy a humorous quip in reaction to a John Esq. posting. These were not “attacks” although they were usually unprovoked. But they were also blatantly funny.
More often (FAR more often) John Esq. would “draw first blood”, although, to his mind, only my retaliations constituted “ad hominem attacks”.
John: You have been blatantly disrespectful to me whenever I said anything you did not agree with. Plus, you have equally been disingenuous in your very broad characterizations of what I had (not actually) said.
“Childish”
“not a full deck”
“Gollum”
“Chutzpah”
“Thought I was better then that”
(These examples are without actually looking).
Dozens more exist.
I’m frankly sick of your whining.
Your evil twin has finally taken over.
You antagonize, mischaracterize and outright affront, then, you wait for a reaction in kind to take before the “United Nations”.
” . . .additional baggage I bring to the forum as a white, European, non-Jews.”
I don’t care what you are. It does not change one molecule of what was discussed.
You (if I recall) made a comment some time back regarding my cited authors all being Jewish (”Can’t you find a source not written by Jews”)? Wasn’t that you?
” . . while Steve and Isidor, both Jews, were forever arguing in favor of continued hostilities. They are worthy “opponents” - Actually I hold them both in some affection, which I guess makes me a little twisted . . ”
If I had said “twisted” you would have gone to The Haige.
“were forever arguing in favor of continued hostilities . . ”
I have no idea what you are talking about. The lack of peace in the Mid East is a constant source of oppression for all Jews (worldwide), especially assertive ones with Israeli sounding last names.
We simply disagree as to what steps would cause the (present) hostile situation to remediate.
Unconditional surrender would work for about a month. What you seem to be advocating is an Israeli surrender.
Take for example the ongoing debate about “refugees” (both Hebrew and Arab). While you acknowledge that both populations were displaced (Jews from mid-east countries) you fail to do the math. Doing the math, the exchange is (and always has been) roughly equal, even assuming (as you do) that Arabs were forced out en-masse (which I continue to debate). You completely ignore the international legal treaties following WW1, which called for a 45k sq. mile Jewish National Homeland. In fact, any point which detracts from your position is either ignored, insulted as a “fraud” (Remember your statement re: Joan Peters?) or characterized as being somehow otherwise biased, by asserting that the authors were themselves bias-as being themselves Jewish.
You wanted a “Gollum”? My pleasure to be yours.
July 15th, 2007 at 11:49 am
John wrote: “I was just tired of it, of being unable to discuss anything with Steve or Isidor without being personally attacked. I am not talking about teasing, but the frequent suggestions that I might be anti-Semitic. I may be “unoppressed” but I am not an anti-Semite. I’m not “over-concerned” about being perceived as such; I’m just tired of it.”
I guess I’ve got a lot to learn about fellow Jews who are in the “peace” camp. I
July 15th, 2007 at 11:57 am
Sorry.
I’ve not spoken to nor had any dialogue with peace activists. I guess I assumed that John’s viewpoint would be entirely consistent with the views others on a Jewish Voice For Peace blog. Perhaps I was wrong.
I don’t think I called you (John) an anti-Semite. I suspect like any kind of prejudice there are degrees of anti-Semitism. I believe it was Abraham Foxman who wrote — about Mel Gibson prior to his tirade against the Jews and our responsibility for all the wars — that he did not consider Gibson the kind of man who woke up in the morning saying, “I’m going to get a Jew today!”
As it turns out maybe Gibson does wake up in the morning with this idea in mind. I remember how insulted Mel Gibson was and many, many of his admirers were when Foxman questioned his motives for doing the “Passion of Christ.”
I likewise questioned his motives.
July 15th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
There are different degrees and also different permutations of anti-Jewry. However, common in most cases is the denial aspect. Mel Gibson still denies it. I have actually been called an “Anti-Semite” on another blog, by a Jewish guy, simply because I mentioned my concept of the “two-voices” (previously posted herein above).
On a group e-mail, another guy (who I know personally) accused me of not having a “Jewish soul”. No debate there, as I reject the mere notion of such a thing. But his comment was intended to be degrading. Some people say that stereotypes are inherently racist but I say that our entire understanding of day-to-day life is based on a collection of stereotypes.
Certain people resent Jews due to the perception that they (we) have far more leverage in the world then they/we are otherwise entitled to.
Some people are jealous of their/our success.
Some people believe in hereditary guilt and Jews are (in their mind) deserving of any and all punishment they receive.
Some people blame Jews for anything that is not fair (scapegoating).
The list continues; some people have a combo-plate and it is only fair to say that certain people exalt Jews above their rightful place as well. If a Jew is too pro-Jewish, this can be a sign of racism towards non-Jews.
If a non-Jew is too pro-Jewish, this can be the result of a number of factors, including their own guilt/shame (I think Pres. Bush II had some of this going on, due to the past, involving his Father and especially his Grandfather, Sen. Prescott Bush.)
There is no scientific method to access how and why and how much, either way (pro or anti). Obviously, someone who claims that Jews are the devil, is pretty-much defined. However, 90+ % of all anti-Jewish sentiment is oblique and obtuse and kept that way be design.
July 15th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
On a group e-mail, another guy (who I know personally) accused me of not having a “Jewish soul”. No debate there, as I reject the mere notion of such a thing. >>>>
Oh, because you don’t believe people have souls. You think when we die, whatever was this spark of life, what have you, is food for the earth worms and that is that. Nothing more to our brief existence. My Hindu and Buddhist friends believe we have souls. So do Jews and Christians.
No. I disagree and I believe you have a Jewish soul. Yes, I do believe in Jewish souls. What makes a Jew identify as a Jew, apart from a Jewish soul? Who would want to identify with such a persecuted and a hated people apart from a Jewish soul?
I know gentiles whom I believe have Jewish souls.
July 15th, 2007 at 4:25 pm
Did I say I did not believe in souls? I said I do not believe in sectarian (specifically Jewish) souls.
As for what I do believe:
If there is an “after-life” (and there may be) it is beyond our human reach to know and for good reason:
1. If we knew for sure, then, hey, unhappy with the cards one is dealt, call it a day.
2. We have very little in-debth understanding of this plane of existance. Emagine the vanity of assuming we understand the NEXT life when we have a very shakey grip on this one?
I live my life as if there will be an accounting, even though I have concluded that there may not be.
Living in a particular form or mannor, in order to gain a per-se (guaranteed) acceptance into a guaranteed per-se heaven, is considerably more self-centric.
You are free of course to believe whatever pleases you.
“I believe you have a Jewish soul. . . ”
I only ask that you reserve your opinion to the status and nature of your own soul.
I take no offense in your assertion that I possess a Jewish soul. I simply take intellectual exception. (Frankly, I think I have the soul of a lesbian).
July 15th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
“I said I do not believe in sectarian (specifically Jewish) souls.”
Jews are not a sect. We are a nation. A people. Some Jews are atheists. They are still Jews.
You believe you are lesbian. Fine. You believe that you are a woman born in a man’s body. That is what you think. OK.
July 15th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
Sect, nation or Mickey-Mouse fan club.
My point is unchanged regardless.
I don’t really think I have a lesbian soul. It really wouldn’t be so bad. Suppose, hypothetically, that such a thing was possible . .
Such a person would be the only man attractive to lesbians. Sounds like a pay-per-view. Especially if strait women remained disinterested.
Admit it, the concept is titalating . .
July 16th, 2007 at 7:06 am
Gentlemen, just checking back in to see if I had left you with any bad feelings or stirred up any new ones. Looks like some remain. I apologize. I am not going away mad, just going away (slowly!) because I think I am somewhat offensive in this forum even without meaning to be, the world being what it is. Or let’s put it this way, there’s still more work to be done in terms of Gentile-Jewish relations and understanding before a gentile should go hammering away on a Jewish blog about Israeli policy. My bad. My dumb. My insensitive. Anyway, neither of you did anything “wrong.” Peace.
I have been doing a little research into “my people,” and thought I’d pass some stuff on in case it’s as interesting to you as to me. My people are Czechs. My mother and her large family came to America in steerage along with hundreds of other immigrants in 1910. Bohemia was at that time part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and it turns out that my grandparents left - actually escaped (grandfather was a pacifist and an AWOL Austrian draftee and then an illegal immigrant to Germany) - because they had been oppressed in their own way by the same people that were oppressing the Jews of their day: the royalty, the landowning nobility, and especially the RC clergy. You can read about the history of the Jews of Prague here:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/vjw/Prague.html
Note especially the paragraph about Czech-German culture wars in the late 19th. c., as my grandparents’ story relative to that culture-war loosely parallels the Jewish story except that my family opted-out and went to America while at least some of the Jews opted-out and became Zionists.
It is as mixed a picture as one can imagine. As Michelle says, the Czechs (kings esp.) were throughout controlling the Jews, but against that background there were both horrible and glorious periods. There was both the Prague Massacre of 1389 and the 16th c. Prague Renaissance and the Edict of Toleration of Joseph II in 1781. There was a ghetto dating from the 11th c. But it was named Josefov by the Jews in appreciation of Joseph II and it was offically abolished as a ghetto in 1859 and became just a district of Prague, which it still is. There were periods of renaissance marked by expulsions followed by recalls. There could not be a more mixed bag. I am horrified to think distant ancestors of mine could have participated in anti-Semitism, but to claim to know “what happened” is really to claim esoteric knowledge. I only know that if my mother’s family were exposed to any anti-Semitism in Europe they brought none of it with them and had nothing but respect for the Jewish people in their community. Once they arrived here and located in a small predominately Scots-Irish community, my mother and her brothers and sisters hung out with other European, non-English speaking kids - Jewish and gentile - because they were all targeted by the Anglos and had to stick together and defend each other as immigrants. Even my dear mother was in schoolyard scraps, which is hard for me to imagine. I know her best friend in high school was a Jewish girl who btw taught her how to make a mean gefilte fisch. Anyway, the whole thing is such a mixed and uneven history, it’s impossible even to know within one’s own family beyond a generation or two what the situation was. At the end of the day I don’t know beyond the broad historical outlines how to characterize my particular people. I’m sure some humility advisable because I just plain don’t know “what happened.” Personally, I am only willing to take responsibility for myself and try not to judge others. That’s more than enough responsibility for anybody.
Vacation time for me. Going to San Diego. I will listen in next week to see how things are going. Shalom.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:07 am
Talkback #1. Aren’t you sick to your stomach of yet another editorial of what-the-Palestinians-should-choose-to-do?
Mo - Israel
07/15/2007 23:44
This disaster is not the choice of the “Palestinians” — IT IS THE CHOICE WE HAVE MADE. Israel has chosen to allow these savages to make war on us. We have chosen the mantra of “peace process” and “no military solution”. We have chosen to legitimize terrorists like Mahmoud Abbas. We have chosen to follow corrupt, incompetent, defeatist appeasers. We are like this editorial — realizing everything that we’re doing wrong, and then whining that the Palestinians have to make a choice!
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1184489825394&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Jul. 15, 2007 22:16 | Updated Jul. 16, 2007 17:33
A Palestinian choice
Talkbacks for this article: 4
Starting with Yasser Arafat following the 1993 Oslo Accords, Israel and the US have a long record of choosing “pragmatic” Palestinian leaders, attempting to prop them up, and watching with dismay as the guns and butter invested are squandered and turned against Israel. The latest disappointment has been Mahmoud Abbas, whose abundant Western-supplied weaponry was captured by the ton by Hamas, which easily overran Gaza, and sent Abbas’s forces packing.
Now, like true gluttons for punishment, we are trying the same tactic again, this time with the same discredited leader. Abbas never did anything about corruption, would not confront Hamas, and failed to touch the Fatah old guard that so discredited him among the Palestinian people. It was this failure to reform that convinced Palestinians to vote for Hamas, and ultimately caused the collapse of Fatah’s numerically stronger forces in Gaza when Hamas made its move a few weeks ago……. Until now, Fatah has had the luxury of pretending it had decided to make peace with Israel, while keeping the war against Israel as alive as it could. Now the price of such a policy will be abdication to Hamas, which stands for the policy of never ending the war with Israel and never building a state.
There is a limit to what Israel, the US or anyone else can do to help Palestinian leaders make this choice. Ultimately, it is their own. They must decide if they want the state they claim to have been fighting for, or not. If so, they will have to begin waging peace rather than war, and will have to focus inward on building, rather than outward on attacking. As usual, all of us will lose if they make the wrong choice.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:55 am
John:
Your family history, while interesting does not reflect on your actions, good or bad.
Some overt Jew-haters have said that their parents helped Jews fleeing Europe (e.g. Presidential Candidate Karl Schwarz). His story does not impress me. His words are his.
However, when you say:
“I know her best friend in high school was a Jewish girl who btw taught her how to make a mean gefilte fisch.”
Now I am worried because any non-Jew who eats gefilte fisch, let alone learns to make it has some serious issues.
Steve:
It was a mistake to assume that the Palestinian-Arab leadership would eventually come to their senses. But that mistake was mainly imposed on Israel by the rest of the world.
These P.A. leaders must be duplicitious or they will be overthrown internally.
If they do not show the “West” a happy (”Ronald McDonald”) face, they will get no aid.
My personal instinct is that Abbas can be worked with, although to his own people, he is exactly like Arafat was to us.
The Palestinian-Arabs must be addressed and reached on an intelectual level. They must not be subjected to more decades of propaganda and false history and promises of a glorious conquest of Israel.
The so called “refugee” population MUST be allowed to gain human rights WHERE THEY NOW ARE before considering or contemplating any negotiation to move to Israel or anywhere else.
It was a great mistake to permit the children of the displaced to continue to maintain “refugee” status. This was NOT done to help them but to fight the Jews at their expense.
The UNHCR must be charged with its foremost task of finding permanant homes for these nationless people.
The Israelis, for their part, must understand that the Arabs and Muslims are not going away and also, the use of overwhelming retaliation (some indiscriminantly) is only worsening their problems.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
any non-Jew who eats gefilte fisch, let alone learns to make it has some serious issues.
Europeans eat weird stuff. My grandfather used to eat raw hamburger meat with a raw egg on top. Gefilte fisch is good with some fresh horseradish. Very labor intensive to make. She didn’t make it often, but when she did she always talked about Bessie (”We could talk about anything”). Later
July 16th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
Everyone eats some weird stuff.
Gefilte fisch should be OUTLAWED as a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, along with Kidney Pie and red-radishes.
I remember growing up at family gatherings, my female cousins would often bring non-Jewish boyfriends for dinner and did I ever pity them for having to eat it. They rarely returned and I am sure the Gefilte fisch cult had some effect on this.
Did you hear me Steve? Gefilte fisch is a CULT. Not a sect and not a nation.
Instead of shooting 50mm machine-guns at the Palestinian-Arabs, the Israelis should shoot Gefilte fisch. The Arabs have no weapons to combat that. Game over.
Before I was born, the standard procedure (I am told) was to have live fish swimming around one’s bath-tub. DISGUSTING!!!
This is our dark past that we must learn to face.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
Norwegians eat lutefisk. Now that’s disgusting.
July 17th, 2007 at 7:36 am
Lutefisk is the piece of cod which surpasseth all understanding.
July 17th, 2007 at 7:46 am
“Officials report massacre of Shiites in Iraq –
Associated Press: 17-July 2007:
BAGHDAD - Dozens of Shiite villagers in the north were massacred by Sunni extremists, two officials said Tuesday, while a car bomb exploded across the street from the Iranian Embassy in the heart of Baghdad and killed four civilians.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19802135/
Re: “extremists”
Even herein, the journalist who filed the report is afraid (or not permitted) to use the word: ‘Terrorists’.
Of course, there is no outcry, no outrage. Barbaric and horrific civilian attacks continue to occur in Iraq on a daily basis.
This is what Muslims do to each other. No wonder the Israelis maintain a pervasive fear of what they would to to them.
My great uncle Ezekial once told me:
‘Even paranoids have real enemies’.
July 17th, 2007 at 7:51 am
“Lutefisk”
I read the detail. Sounds disgusting. Plus, if not properly prepaired, it can be toxic.
The Fins and Swedes also eat same.
Having not tried it though, I can’t assert (or refute) that it is actually more or less gagifying then G.F.
July 17th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/883052.html
see also:
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=83901
Assad makes three demands which he knows will be unacceptable to Israel. To what purpose?
July 18th, 2007 at 1:58 am
There is a longstanding and not uncommon tradition among crap-shooters (casino dice players). If it takes too long for the dealer to gather up the dice, players will often withdraw their bets or even leave the table.
The art of knowing when a simple procedure is ‘taking too long’ can be a cogent element of day-to-day life. Such delays can have perceived meanings or simply be considered a general harbinger of ‘bad luck’. If a guy fails to propose marriage following a pre-set amount of (reasonable) time, this has a distinct meaning to the woman. If one’s food takes too long to be served at a restaurant, people expect that some problem existed, and so forth.
I never could understand why the “Arafat” represented “peace process” needed so many years to fall apart. Most people lived through these years without taking any notice. However, I knew that after a few years went by, something was fundamentally going wrong, or, was being planned as such.
To illustrate the human dynamics, consider a memorable scene in the Clint Eastwood movie, “Heartbreak Ridge” (1986) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091187/ wherein the troops are disorderly and undisciplined, until Sgt. Highway (Eastwood) takes over the platoon. After short order he has these men back in line, where they remain, until one of their fellow enlisted persons (Swede Johansen, a.k.a. pro football linebacker Peter Koch) is released from the brig (jail). In an instant, the entire platoon becomes disobedient all over again, in the belief that this guy (Johansen) will make an example out of Eastwood.
The ending is not relevant to any real-life comparison. What is totally relevant is the process by which the marines bide their time is anticipation of the day when their enforcer, Swede, will return and re-take charge from the drill-sergeant.
This is a close comparison to the events leading up to the day in 2,000, when Chairman Arafat stormed out of the peace negotiations in an agitated huff. In reality, he had never been their, except as an act, biding his time until a few things happened .
1. Al Qaeda gained necessary momentum to commence WW4.
2. The price of oil began to rise.
3. A variety of Muslim nations gained military leverage through the development and possession of WMDs. These included Pakistan, Iraq (yes, you heard me) and to a slower development stage, Iran.
Mr. Rabin assured the Israelis (during his campaign) that he was NOT going to part with the Golan. Had he been truthful, he may not have won the election. That is the primary reason (IMHO) why right-wing militants had him killed.
Bottom line, Dr. Assad does not want to meet the same fait as Mr. Rabin. So, he makes overtures of continued conflict rather then of peace. But in reality, what he really wants is to take back a few years of past mistakes.
Great Uncle Ezekiel say: “When you’ve dug yourself a hole so large that you can get out of it, the first order of business is to stop digging.” Syria can not bring itself to stop digging, even though it wants out of the hole.
Syria sees as much of a pending threat and danger from the growing wave of Islamic radicalism as Israel sees. It does not have oil. Syria does not wish to be caught on the wrong and potentially loosing side of a new war, wherein it is also known to be complicit in the possible perpetration of a major terror attack. Assad says: ‘Return the Golan first’ but want he really means is return to the talks and discuss the Golan. However, he lacks sufficient leverage to say what he means.
July 18th, 2007 at 8:44 am
John, in the hearing of the late Pope John Paul II on a May 2001 visit, Syria’s President Assad said, “They (the Jews) tried to kill the principles of all religions with the same mentality in which they betrayed Jesus Christ and the same way they tried to betray and kill the Prophet Muhammad.”
This man is a vicious Jew-hater. The Pope and Vatican silence on this outrageous diatribe spoke volumes.
Can you imagine the international outrage were an Israeli prime minister to utter the same kind of remarks about the Muslims?
July 18th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
“They (the Jews) tried to kill the principles of all religions with the same mentality in which they betrayed Jesus Christ and the same way they tried to betray and kill the Prophet Muhammad”
Wasn’t this a quote from the head cleric of Domascus?
July 18th, 2007 at 3:05 pm
Wasn’t this a quote from the head cleric of Domascus? >>>>
I believe it was Bashar Assad.
July 18th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
hi all,
john, here’s another real jewish voice for peace. as oppose to the members of the organization which calls themselves JVP in a remarkably orwellian move.
michelle, you obviously have an agenda regarding europe. i can’t figure out if it’s christian europeans, or white people or what, but you have such a strong agenda that you can see the flaws in your argument.
you make european jews an exception, saying they didn’t fully absorb that aspect of european culture. you ignore examples of non-europeans making the same moves, like the muslim moghuls of india. and you count the US and israel as european countries, culturally.
you’re making so many exceptions that your point is silly.
admit it, violence, taking land, all that, they are human traits, not european traits. it happens in africa, in happens in asia, it happens everywhere.
i don’t know why you need to demonize europe. i’d be curious to find out, actually.
July 18th, 2007 at 8:22 pm
“It is time to return to the principles of international legality: The banning of the acquisition of territory by force, the right of peoples to self-determination, respect for the resolutions of the United Nations organisation and the Geneva conventions,” the pope said”
http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/05/05/pope.syria/
Check the date of this speech:
—May 5, 2001
During the ramp-up of rhetoric before Sept. 11.
Steve was accurate in that the quote he posted was from Assad. But that is only to be expected of him and his Stallinist regime. What the Pope said, did and most importantly, what he did not say in reply to the statement made by Assad, seems to me to be much more significant.
If the Israelis were truely NOT guilty of the various transgressions they are routinely blamed for, such a guilty nation would still have to be invented, to permit the neighboring tirants to have an eternal ralling-cry. Without an enemy, there is no need for tyrants.
July 18th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
PS> Ironic that the Pope is part of the same regime (Roman then ‘Holy-Roman’) and through his official “Apostolic succession” which groups initially annexed Jerusalem and wiped out its Jewish population. Like Ted Kennedy accusing someone of adultery.
July 19th, 2007 at 3:07 am
PPS>
“. . . right of peoples to self-determination . . .”
This was the same accusation which Carter wrote in his post 9-11 NY Times Op-Ed.
The accusation clear. Namely, that Israel somehow actively prevents the Palestinian-Arabs from governing themselves.
Of course, no mention is made by ‘his infallibility’ that Syria had one of the most repressive regimes on the face of the earth, even exporting its repression throughout neighboring (heavily Catholic) Lebanon. Essentially, that Syria’s own citizens lacked “self determination”. Unless one calls a 97% favorable vote from people who only have one candidate to choose between “self determining”. Whereas, in Israel, the Arab citizens have seats represented in the Knesset.
The Lebanese constitution BTW, mandates absolute governmental control by Christians, regardless of the demographic make-up of its population. No mention of this is the Pope’s speech.
There is also an acute lacking of “self determination” within the Vatican itself and it has been this way since its formation in 334-CE.
Both John-Paul and Carter were proven wrong on at least that subject. The P.A. has now had a free democracy for several years and look what they have achieved!! Armed and hooded thugs throwing other thugs off roof-tops.
The best thing the PA could do for its self and its people is to ask the outside world, (even Israel) to please administer them a workable and functional government.
As for the Vatican, it often suffers from the same basic problem found within the leadership of other religions, namely, they should endeavor to keep politics out of their official cannons.
July 19th, 2007 at 4:10 am
There is an old adage about placing a live frog in a sauce pan full of cold water and slowly heating the water. According to the story, the frog will not realize it is being cooked.
We Americans are in the position of the cooking frog.
Our country is being acquired by giant financial enterprise and many of us are in denial about the seemingly slow raising of the water temp. People with original or innovative thought patterns are being routinely punished and stupidity is being rewarded, nay, exalted. The “professionals” for their parts (doctors, lawyers, etc.) think that if they just remain steady, that eventually will eventually self-correct. They too are in denial because at the present rate of decline, there will be no money in the hands of the ordinary person by which to pay the professions.
Off-point but exceedingly critical.
July 19th, 2007 at 7:09 am
There is an interesting interview on today’s Frontpage with Ralph Peters, on new book, Wars of Blood and Faith: The Conflicts That Will Shape the 21st Century.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=29209
It’s interesting to me in light of having read Jimmy Carter’s book where over and over again he writes about the deep sense of humiliation felt by the Palestinians due to their lack of “dignity” afforded to them by the Jews.
Yesterday I bought and watched an almost one hour National Geographic video on “Female Suicide Bombers.” The same thing was repeated over and over again. The self-pity, the hatred, the rage at those who are perceived to have humiliated Islam, the Palestinians, whomever in the Muslim world.
Ralph Peters wrote the following in his interview:
“Islamists and their sympathizers are humiliated by their self-wrought failures, angry at our success, sick with jealousy, and desperately in need of a hot date. The greater Middle East is one vast psycho-ward. And no, I’m not being flippant or exaggerating–the region’s Muslim societies are mentally and morally diseased.
“Hatred is satisfying. Revenge (even against the innocent) is gratifying. And death is a release from the miseries of a failed existence. As a result–as I’ve remarked over the years–we face ruthless killers who regard death as a promotion. But, of course, our leaders assure us that religion has nothing to do with any of this.
July 19th, 2007 at 11:19 am
Steve:
Again brother:
What do you suppose that this same population of people would be like if they had no belief in any God? Because that is the very possible trade-off. Christians will often assume that Islam merely stands in the way of the Arabs’ acceptance of Jesus. That is a potentially fatal miscalculation.
The Muslim religion is far more prone to being ‘hyjacked’ (for political reasons) then, say, Buddhism but anyone in their right mind knows better then to blow up civilians in the name of Allah.
July 19th, 2007 at 11:42 am
Isador,
I believe in God but my faith is life affirming. I’m not going to blow myself up for my God. My God would not be pleased by this.
Apparently Islam’s God is pleased with the suicide bomber. Yasir Arafat told the young girls and children — according to this National Geographic video — to be martyrs; to desire death.
Isn’t this what little children in Gaza are taught? In the West Bank too?
July 19th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
“Yasir Arafat told the young girls and children — according to this National Geographic video — to be martyrs; to desire death.”
I have seen these videos. There are hours of defaming tape on this subject.
But you have selected an example that affirms my point. Yasser Arafat is supposed to have been sane?
Yasser Arafat = Charles Manson with an army behind him.
He also believed that Mr. Mohammed traveled from the Dome of the Rock (Al Aska) to heaven, a few hundred years after he passed away, (according to the historical) record, which states that the Mosque was a Catholic Church, during Mr. Mohammed’s entire life-span.
You have picked perhaps the single most twisted character in the 20th century Mid East to highlight.
My earlier point was: No one in their RIGHT MIND would do such things. Arafat had no “right-mind”.
July 19th, 2007 at 5:55 pm
Attention all leftists & liberals ala self-professed . .
“Eating beef ‘ is less green than driving’
Producing 2.2lb of beef generates as much greenhouse gas as driving a car non-stop for three hours, it was claimed yesterday.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/19/nbeef119.xml
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This does not count the horrific crulety involved or the support of giant multi-national cartels (McDonnalds, B.K. Iowa Beef (Hormel) etc.). Nor does it account for the increased heart problems or associated cancers, even among children. While we lament for the Palestinian-Arabs sending their children as martyrs, we also send ours, only on the slower ‘installment plan’ called “Happy-Meal”
July 20th, 2007 at 2:36 am
Isador - How right you are about American fast food. Thank G-d in Israel McDonnalds is an expensive restaurant so only the upper middle class can afford it. In general meat is expensive here, and since my daughter is a vegetarian we serve meat only once or twice/week.
Whenever I come to the US I am immediately struck by how overweight everyone seems there. It must be all the dairy products and fast food that people eat in large quantities as dietary staples. Americans are supersized
I have question for you that is off topic, but so are most of the posts on this blog.
I was having a conversation with a Palestinian gentleman in Jerusalem whose home had been demolished by the municipality. It was a rare case where they actually offered to buy the property (for about half of what it was worth) and he refused. I heard his tale of tragedy and he told me he would never move because it was his home and had lived there all his life. He also told me that the Koran prohibited him from selling land to Jews, then he qualifies the statement and said he was prohibited from selling to any non-Muslim Occupier.
I’ve noticed you have extensive knowledge of the Koran. Can you quote me chapter and verse where this prohibition can be found, if indeed it exists. Thanks
July 20th, 2007 at 6:10 am
Fred:
Last part first:
I am handly with computer search tools. Not an authority on the Qur~an. I have read the entire text and when doing so, made certain notes on specific sections that were pertainant to topics that I was already deep into.
While I am no expert, I have another blog where proper (Muslim) answers do get posted in reply to my questions and I will relay the question there.
Regarding overweight Americans:
I am a chubby who can ski down a double-black-diamond. Plus, I eat extremely healthy. You are down to 2 servings of meat a week while I am down to 2 portions of white flour a week. I think in my case the lack of exhertion in my day job caused a slow increasing of my weight. Over 25 years, it adds up. I won’t point to stress because Israelis have more stress then we do. However (generally) you guys are also inclined to care much more about looking good or at least, not looking bad.
Back to the Qur~an:
My experience is that many Muslims rely on verbal conveyances, without chapter-and-verse and therefore, can often be found to have been mislead.
BTW: As I understand it, nothing in the Hebrew Scriptures states that Jews must weare hats. So, tradition can be found which stands-in as scripture on our side as well.
Will update.
July 23rd, 2007 at 1:51 am
Current events:
The city of New York has spent $78-million of out of its Federal grant of $1-billion on legal fees, in an attempt to evade liability for the health-care and disability payments to Sept. 11 first-responders (firemen, police, rescue and clean-up). Initially, the governmental officials, which included New York State and City managers as well as Christie Todd Whitman (as Federal EPA Chief), insisted that the Ground-Zero area was safe. As a result, poorly protected workers exposed themselves to a toxic cocktail of Mercury, Asbestos, Jet-A fuel and other known carcinogens without proper protective clothing or breathing apparatus.
The Federal Government then allocated $1-billion in funding, specifically for the treatment and care of these workers, who are now dying of leukemia, Hodgkin’s and other cluster-based illnesses. The City of New York was merely appointed administrator (caretaker or trustee) of the funds. However, the City has refused to disperse this funding and instead, has squandered nearly eight percent in legal fees to date. Of course, the litigation is far from concluded.
The City has claimed “Sovereign Immunity”. This is a carry-over from the British system whereby the tax collectors and so forth were immunized from civil action as a representative of the King.
“Sovereign Immunity” exists no where in the U.S. constitution and since it was traditionally a central component of British Common-law, the ‘Founding Fathers’ surely would have included it if they had wanted to follow the British model. Except that these leaders, Madison, Washington, Adams, Jefferson and others were endeavoring to escape the yoke of the British Crown and its ongoing oppression of the ‘landed gentry’ (themselves). Since it was this same ‘Landed Gentry’ who had semi-exclusive use the U.S. Courts anyway, creating a blanket shield of this nature was clearly against the beliefs and wishes of the ‘Founding Fathers’ and hence, contrary to the U.S. Constitution.
However, several decades ago the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that such was an implied component of the U.S. constitution or at any rate, could legally be read-into our language directly from British common-law.
However, for a governmental agency to be protected by it, the immunity clause must first be legislated by the individual state-level government. Many states have done this and as a result, in some states, one can not even sue a worker at a state school for molesting one’s child. New York State (for whatever reason) has never invoked “Sovereign Immunity”. Nonetheless, the City of New York, who can not even legislate such self immunity even if it wanted to, (because it is not a state) has made this claim, wherein the money being sought by the victims does not even belong to the City in the first place. Before the litigation is over, knowing the system, most of the funding will have been depleted on high-priced law-firms.
In the mean time, the brave (volentary) victims of 9-11 are loosing their houses (and dying young), while paying their own lawyers.
July 23rd, 2007 at 5:10 am
Since the Feds provided the funds in the first place, and designated the City of New York as trustee of the funds, can’t the Federal Government just tell New York to cut the bullsh-t and pay the compensation?
July 23rd, 2007 at 9:08 am
Of course, that solution would make sense. Perhaps if enough publicity is generated, that is exactly what will occur. However, lacking publicity or a general outcry from the public, we were being ruled by judicial caviot.
http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.asp?n=1&neID=200707181680.2_d577006bb6a6460e
July 23rd, 2007 at 5:30 pm
http://www.cair.com/default.asp?Page=articleView&id=44567&theType=NB
American Muslim News Briefs
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Incitement: Neal Boortz Threatens to ‘Eradicate’ Muslims
INCITEMENT: RADIO HOST NEAL BOORTZ CALLS ISLAM A ‘CULT,’ THREATENS TO ‘ERADICATE’ MUSLIMS
The following are excerpts from a dialogue between radio host Neal Boortz and a Muslim caller to his program. (SEE: http://boortz.com/) An audio clip of the program is circulating on anti-Muslim Internet hate sites. It is not known when the program aired.
Caller: Sir I’m calling because of some statements you been making in the past week about the religion of Islam and. . .”
Neal Boortz: It’s a cult it’s not even a religion. . .
Boortz: You don’t have a word of condemnation in you until the non-Islamic world rises up and starts to make it clear that we are fed up with your damned religion. We’ve had it up to here.
And somebody, like I said yesterday, somebody needs to grab the Muslim world by the shirt collar, backhand it a good one, knock it into the damn corner and say straighten up or we’re gonna eradicate you beetles from the face of the Earth…
LISTEN TO THE AUDIO CLIP:
http://www.cair.com/audio/Neal_Boortz/neal.htm
(Click twice on start button.)
(Note: Please DO NOT attempt to contact Neal Boortz. Mr. Boortz can and will use any comments to further defame Islam and Muslim. This clip was offered only to demonstrate the growing level of Islamophobic rhetoric in our society.)
July 24th, 2007 at 7:47 am
P.A. has now had a free democracy for several years…
This is a cruel joke. They had a democratic election but their overlords rejected the outcome and completely cut off the flow of monies. I can well understand why Israel made that choice. But it shows that this is a “democracy” without meaning or validity. The PA is not a country. It’s an archipelago of military occupied ghettos. What could be more worthless than a Palestinian’s vote? An election in the occupied territories is like prisoners choosing who gets to pass out the soup spoons this month. It has no meaning in the over-arching military administrative system where compliance is all that counts. How can you call that a free democracy? A Palestinian’s vote has no real power of self-determination.
OK, cut off the revenues. But don’t throw democracy back in their faces. This is not a fair criticism, because in cutting off the monies, Israel blew the knee-caps off their “democracy.
July 24th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
John:
Usual unfair ascessment.
Israel is offered a selection of fruitless alternatives and then, no mater what they do, it is not only wrong, but evil, racist, unlawful, etc..
If the two primary issues were worked out, nothing serious would stand in the way of settling the matter. But they can’t work out the basics. Namely, borders and who (if anyone) from outside those borders gets to claim citizenship inside.
You can ramble for weeks, make that months with your patented version of reality — covering each and every sub-category. It is wasted effort because all else subordinates to the two above referenced issues.
I say that Israel and the world has done their utmost to help cultivate a working Palestinian-Arab (democratic) government and you find reason after reason to condemn. Which reminds me of an old lesson I learned. If the debater has one, maybe two or possibly three good points, they usually stop there. When their asserted points run into the dozens (like yours) this tells me that you can’t possibly be seeing strait. When you have a canned condemnation on each and every front, that tells me you are making them us as you go along.
July 24th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
I expressly said the Palestinians were not above criticism. But the “free democracy” talking point is unfair. It’s the occupation, amigo. No matter how much lipstick you put on it, it’s still a pig.
I’m sure Israel and the rest of the world have done everything they could to get a democratic government up and running there. It’s in their interest to do that. But it’s still an occupation. The rest is lipstick on a pig.
Can a Palestinian vote to get the settlements and outposts out of the WB/G? Can he vote to get the curfews and roadblocks and checkpoints eliminated? Can he vote to leave freely and return freely? Can he vote to have the separation barrier removed? Can he vote to have unlimited free access to his fields and olive groves? Of course not. So how can you speak of the PA as a free democracy and criticize it for not functioning properly?
But they can’t work out the basics.
Why not???
July 24th, 2007 at 5:48 pm
“Can a Palestinian vote to get the settlements and outposts out of the WB/G? Can he vote to get the curfews and roadblocks and checkpoints eliminated? Can he vote to leave freely and return freely? Can he vote to have the separation barrier removed? Can he vote to have unlimited free access to his fields and olive groves? Of course not. So how can you speak of the PA as a free democracy and criticize it for not functioning properly?”
Nor can Israel vote to have Medina returned as a Jewish town. Nor can Israel vote to get a share of the M.E. oil. Nor, nor, nor . .
“But they can’t work out the basics.
Why not???”
Because the Arabs have traditionally been unwilling to accept any semblance of a reasonable split. To them, “reason” is the quotent of size + power.
Israel is 2% of the land in the region and none of the oil. People were displaced on both sides of the equation, as is often the case when one parcel of land in bioforcated along ethnic lines. Nothing unique there. Israel quickly accepted its incomming “refugees” and made a future for them. The Arabs locked their displaced up in human zoos, as future weapons for a re-visit of the ongoing conflict.
If not for the following three facts:
1. The Arabs are somewhat organically intimidating to whites.
2. The Arab tyrants control so much oil.
3. They are convienient allies for those who resent (or hate) Jews to begin with;
HARDLY NO ONE WOULD GIVE A GREEN SH*T FOR THEM.
That does not make them “oppressed”.
The Hong-Kong Chinese used to have a democracy but no longer do. It only slightly bothered them. They are not blowing up civilian targets and/or vowing the distruction of Bejing. They are getting wealthy and educated, which is what the Palestinian-Arabs should have been doing for the past 60 (make that 90) years.
July 25th, 2007 at 8:36 am
In other words, there is no reason.
July 26th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Dear Isador,
I’ve lost confidence in you. You told me in essence, history does not matter. Today I think of your logic that history is irrelevant. Today I think of you Isador and think, well, history does indeed matter.
July 26th, 2007 at 5:19 pm
Steve:
I have no idea what you refer to.
I do not recall saying that ‘history does not matter’. As point-of-fact, I have spent long hours going over history on this very blog.
If occaisionally you lack confidence in me and other times the left position lacks conficence, then I must be doing something right. I just don’t know what at this moment.
July 26th, 2007 at 5:54 pm
Isador,
I have been studying American history. Particularly the period before, during and after President Andrew Jackson. Now perhaps you do not know much about President Jackson and his Indian wars, his Indian Removal Act, etc.
You told me a few days back that this is irrelevant to Bush’s effort to ethnically cleanse the Holy Land of Jews. I beg to differ. You and I do not see eye to eye I guess. You are on one side. I am on the other side.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1185379007592&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Jul. 26, 2007 8:33 | Updated Jul. 26, 2007 9:34
‘Israel should focus on Negev, Galilee’
By JPOST.COM STAFF
Talkbacks for this article: 129
Israel should focus its energies away from settling the West Bank and begin investing its future elsewhere, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Wednesday in an interview with Al Hurra Television, a US-sponsored service broadcasting in the Middle East.
“I believe that Israel understands…that it has obligations that need to be met and need to be met now, because the future of Israel is not in the continued occupation of the West Bank,” Rice said. “The future of Israel is in building a strong Israeli state in places like the Negev and Galilee.”
Rice was reiterating remarks made by President Bush on July 16 in a White House speech devoted to Israeli-Palestinian issues….
July 26th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
“I believe that Israel understands…that it has obligations that need to be met and need to be met now, because the future of Israel is not in the continued occupation of the West Bank,”
George W. Bush is occupying Mexican land, is he not? Isn’t his Crawford Ranch Mexican? Stolen from Mexico? What about Texas, New Mexico, California, Oregon, Nevada, etc., aren’t these Mexican lands illegally occupied by Americans?
July 26th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
Isador,
Mr. Bush lives on illegally occupied Mexican land. Am I right?
July 26th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
In what sense “stolen” or “illegally occupied”?
California, Arizona, Nevada, and parts of New Mexico and Colorado were ceded to the U.S. in by Mexico in 1848 by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and payment of $15,000,000.
Texas had become the independent by revolution in 1837 and existed as the Republic of Texas until it was annexed by the U.S. in 1845, the Texas proposal for annexation having first been turned down by the U.S. in 1837 for fear of provoking war with Mexico. There were many Mexicans (Tejanos) who fought alongside Anglos in the War of Texas Independence in 1837. Now, afterward, the Texans stabbed them in the back and ran many off their ranches which went back to Spanish land grants. In that sense, they did steal land from Mexicans; not from Mexico.
I believe it is fair to say all these lands were acquired legally according to the rules observed among nations during the 19th c. and down to WW I, rules of sovereign nations which ultimately derived from the Peace of Westphalia. The League of Nations abolished the right of acquisition of territory by war in 1929.
July 26th, 2007 at 7:58 pm
Steve:
Pres. Bush is slowly migrating away from support for Israel at about the same time that the Democratic candidates are jockying for position in support themselves.
Rice is a blow-hard empty she-suit and Bush is a front-man for the McDonnald-land consort of Wall street greed-mongers. Whoever awarded Rice a phD should be either deported for stupidity or labotomized — if he (or she) turned out to have slept with her in return for the degree.
In the 18 months they have left, they will NOT force Israel to do anything it does not want to do.
Re: Indians and Mexicans. Get off it already. I know quite a bit about Jackson’s exploits. All those people are long dead. J.B. is correct in that all but Texas was legally ceded.
Israel has a quite strong and equitible claim in its own right, without dragging 200-year old Mexicans into the discussion.
July 27th, 2007 at 8:07 am
“In the 18 months they have left, they will NOT force Israel to do anything it does not want to do.”
Or ever, actually. Not the international community, not the Quartet, not the U.S. is going to force Israel to do anything it does not want to do, ever. How can they?
July 27th, 2007 at 12:05 pm
In theory, enough pressure can be mounted on Israel to compel it to capitulate. Of course, this all depends on what exactly is being demanded and how much pressure is being exerted. As it now stands, if Bush woke up one morning and decided that he has been wrong all along and he further resolved to abandon support for Israel, the U.S. Congress would likely make it difficult for him. The only thing Bush could probably do unilaterally is to vote against Israel in the U.N.
Recalling the immediate aftermath of the 1980’s invasion of Lebanon:
Reagan pressured Israel not to capture Arafat. The world, (wrongly) believing (or wanting to believe) that Israel had murdered Arab civilians, also began a long process of isolation and punishment. All of this eventually led to the Oslo accords and ultimately to Barak offering 95% of West Bank. To this, Arafat rejected with malice and began the 2nd ‘intafata’. Chairman Arafat later stated that Israel’s withdrawal from So. Lebanon created intense pressure on him to ratchet-up the conflict and no settle. I don’t know if this is true or not but that is what he publically stated.
July 27th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
Israel is a sovereign nation. It has a nuclear arsenal and the world’s 5th most powerful military. “Pressure” can accomplish only limited goals, probably in fine tuning policy as to specific dates, etc., etc. Even with pressure, there is bargaining to get something in return for what’s being demanded. And Israel can always say “No!” as Sharon did to Bush directly in 2002 when Bush insisted on withdrawal, removal of settlements, and negotiations with Arafat. What did Bush do? What did Congress do? I can’t see how that could change really, though it is a theoretical possibility I guess.
July 27th, 2007 at 6:43 pm
“Israel is a sovereign nation.”
True, as is the case with almost 200 other “sovereign nations”. Nothing unique there.
“It has a nuclear arsenal and the world’s 5th most powerful military.”
Would you mind explaining how such a comparison is made? “5th most powerful?” Compared with what? Also, for instance, does it take into consideration the allied nature of other countries, such as Egypt & Jordan or Venusalia and Cuba or USA & Canada or Iran & Syria, etc. etc.?
Lastly, of course by now you realize that we often see simple facts very differently. Israel is almost out of allies. Nothing shocking there, as Jews have been ostrocised for thousands of years, wherever they lived. Nonetheless, if the US Congress were to turn its back on Israel, they might have to capitulate. Those who believe that Israel is somehow in control of the White House have a harder time explaining how the US House of Reps and Senate has consistantly supported their position, even when the US president hasn’t.
July 27th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
I don’t know on what basis the IDF is 5th. Nuclear arsenal?
We do see things differently. I don’t think Israel is in charge of the White House and vice versa. Again, how exactly could Israel be forced to capitulate? Not by military threat, obviously. Economic coercion? Americans would never stand for cutting off aid. Sanctions? The US would never permit that in the UN.
What I am trying to point out is that you seem to view Israel as a powerless wimp. It’s a small country and surrounded by larger hostile neighbors, but it’s definitely not powerless. In fact, its army has defeated the neighbors every time it has come up against them. It has nukes and they don’t, for one thing.
July 27th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
“…almost 200 other “sovereign nations”. Nothing unique there.”
Not the point. You cannot simply force a sovereign nation to do something it does not want to do, particularly if said nation is an ally. Coercive diplomacy depends on implied or overt military threat, as in the case of Iran currently. But that is completely impossible in the case of American or European relations with Israel. There would never be military threat implied or otherwise. Sanctions, boycotts, travel restrictions, etc., these things don’t work very well.
July 28th, 2007 at 4:51 am
I believe it is fair to say all these lands were acquired legally according to the rules observed among nations during the 19th c. and down to WW I, rules of sovereign nations which ultimately derived from the Peace of Westphalia. The League of Nations abolished the right of acquisition of territory by war in 1929. >>>>>
Come on John. The US went to war with Mexico for these lands. You try to make it look like we took them fair and square. Ever heard of Manifest Destiny? US stole these lands by aggressive war and you know it. Stop trying to justify the indefensible. You only make yourself look bad.
July 28th, 2007 at 4:55 am
Isador wrote: “I know quite a bit about Jackson’s exploits. ”
What do you know? What did he do with the Native Americans? What were his and American attitudes toward the Native Americans? How does America’s dealings with Native Americans differ or comport with Israel’s dealings with the Arabs?
July 28th, 2007 at 7:44 am
John wrote: “I believe it is fair to say all these lands were acquired legally according to the rules observed among nations during the 19th c. and down to WW I”
You are like one who would argue it was perfectly fair, legal and justified for Cain to murder his brother Abel because the murder was accomplished at time when there was no formal or codified law against murder.
More sophistry, casuistry, evasion, etc.
Rom 5:13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:25 am
US stole these lands by aggressive war
In what sense “aggressive”? Didn’t Mexico attack first? Sounds to me like they were the ones attempting to steal land by aggressive war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican-American_War
July 28th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Come on John. Don’t play ignorant with me. Greedy American settlers squatted on Mexican lands throughout Mexican territories. Good grief John.
http://www.us-coin-values-advisor.com/the-mint-branches-out.html
From the earliest colonial times, rugged pioneers had been drawn to the vast expanses of America’s frontier. Successive generations of settlers pushed the boundaries of the United States ever more westward….
By the 1830’s and 1840’s, the desire to expand westward intensified across all sectors of American society. Most people came to believe it was the purpose of the United States, or its manifest destiny, to own all the territory between the Atlantic and the Pacific. Thus, “Manifest Destiny” became the guiding principle under which the West was won…..
By 1830, the number of Americans living in Texas greatly outnumbered Mexicans, a fact that deeply concerned Mexican authorities. In an attempt to curtail American influence in Texas, Mexico closed the border to immigration from the United States, imposed taxes on the importation of American goods, and restated that slavery on Mexican lands was prohibited. The Mexican government then sent troops into the Texas province to enforce its laws….
The Americans in Texas protested against what they perceived to be a violation of their individual rights.
As tensions escalated over the next several years, the Mexicans responded by sending more troops. Finally, in 1835, violence broke out, prompting the Texans to reject Mexican rule and declare their desire for self rule…..
As the election of 1844 approached, the annexation of Texas became a major campaign issue. The Democrats rejected Martin Van Buren, a former president and member of their own party, in favor of James K. Polk of Tennessee, who strongly favored statehood for Texas and westward expansion. When the electoral college votes were counted, Polk easily outpaced Henry Clay of Kentucky. A majority of congressional candidates supporting expansion won likewise, a clear signal the public supported Texas annexation in particular and Manifest Destiny in general.
With the mandate sent by the voters, outgoing President John Tyler moved quickly to push a statehood resolution for Texas through both houses of Congress, ending the controversy over the fate of the Lone Star Republic. Finally, on December 29, 1845, Texas entered the Union as the twenty-eighth state…..
July 28th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Steve wrote:
“Isador wrote: “I know quite a bit about Jackson’s exploits. ”
What do you know? What did he do with the Native Americans? What were his and American attitudes toward the Native Americans? How does America’s dealings with Native Americans differ or comport with Israel’s dealings with the Arabs? ”
Jackson’s most noteworthy action was to order the U.S. military to violate a decision and order by the U.S. Supreme Court and to march almost the entire Cherokee nation to death (”Trail of Tears”). His other (similarly situated) actions are well known and I do not intend to waste bandwith on them. BTW: My daughter is a direct decendant of the Chief of that fore-mentioned Cherokee Nation, Dan Ross. There is no comparison with Israelis & Arabs. If there were, it would not be legally or morally relivant to 2007. The Arabs control 98% of the land in the M.E. Do the Native Americans control 98% of the USA? Rediculous.
You wrote:
“Come on John. The US went to war with Mexico for these lands. You try to make it look like we took them fair and square. Ever heard of Manifest Destiny? US stole these lands by aggressive war and you know it. Stop trying to justify the indefensible. You only make yourself look bad. ”
Your facts are wrong. As J.B. stated, the independant state of Texas, including a large number of Mexicans, went to war against Mexico. As for the other U.S. States, this land was legally traded with Mexico to become U.S. Terr. However, John left out one point. At that time, Mexico was itself a colony of Spain and therefore the treaty being referenced was actually a treaty between Spain and the USA.
July 28th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
John,
I could only wish you and Isador would live in the same house, under the same roof. You are virtual twins because both of you are ignorant of American history and American depredations. Both of you.
You told me to read Finkelstiens’s book, “Image and Reality.” Even Finkelstein is aware of American depredations. He dwell on it. What is wrong with you?
July 28th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
John,
Please read Finkelstein, “Image and Reality,” CHAPTER FOUR. “Settlement, Not Conquest.” Read pages 88-91.
“The Cherokees were dispossessed of their land even though they had fully adopted as their own the sedentary, agricultural way of life o the white settlers….”
Read John.
July 28th, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Isador,
I don’t want you on my side. I want you on the side of my enemies and Israel’s enemies.
You are an apologist for American depredations. You say American history does not matter.
The historian, Paul Johnson wrote, “(Deir Yssin) bears scrutiny because it is relevant to the moral credentials of the Israeli state.” page 528, “Israel: A History”
Because you are little doubt a self-loathing Jew, you would accept this indictment. But you would not accept any historical scrutiny of American moral credentials.
You are a weak Jew Mr. Isador. Go. Work with my enemies.
July 28th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
Sorry, Paul Johnson’s book is “A History of the Jews.”
http://www.amazon.com/History-Jews-Paul-Johnson/dp/184212479X/ref=sr_1_1/103-5813477-2831846?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1185645613&sr=8-1
July 28th, 2007 at 2:24 pm
I am a Texan but not a self-hating Texan. Texas and the lands of the Mexican Cession were acquired under the international law current in 1845 and ratified by international treaties.
Do you think our colonial fore-fathers stole America from Britain through aggressive war in 1776 and that we are all occupying this land illegally?
Now the Cherokees and other Native Americans are a different matter. Clearly the Europeans were the aggressors. But I see the Palestinian Arabs as the indigenes; not the other way around.
July 28th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
Steve:
That’s fine. Call me what you like. I have been defending Israel and continue to do so before you got here. My ancestors did nothing to steal any land from any Indians or any Mexicans. My Grandmother came from Poland in the 1920s and moved into a stinking apartment in lower Manhattan. How do you know that if the Native Americans were in control of the USA, that she would not have been allowed to legally imigrate? You don’t. In fact, you don’t even know for a fact that if the Native Americans controlled the USA that MORE JEWS would have been welcomed into the USA before WW2. As I have said before, history does matter. But first you need to have your history accurate (you do not) and second, the issues have to be somehow interrelated, which your claims are not. You’re an argument in seek of a partner.
July 28th, 2007 at 2:40 pm
PS> Steve:
Do the Black Americans who’s ancesstors were brought here in chains owe any debt to the Native Americans? Guys like you love the Indians because (among other things) they are already dead and can be romanced for your imagination.
July 28th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
PPS>
Calling me the same as John Baker is perhaps the only comment you could possibly make to perturb me.
July 28th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Do you think our colonial fore-fathers stole America from Britain through aggressive war in 1776 and that we are all occupying this land illegally?>>>>>>
Our colonial fore-fathers “rebelled” against Britain. We are indeed occupiers. Is it illegal? I’m not sure, but when I see you, a worthless Texan, pass judgment on Israel, yes you are an illegal occupier and usurper. You are usurper of the lowest and most despicable order.
July 28th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
How do you know that if the Native Americans were in control of the USA>>>
I have a Native American horse farmer across the road. He raises fine thoroughbreds. He’s Sioux Indian. He is the only man I know who can call-out and shoot coyotes. I give him permission to hunt them on my land. I’ve had Cherokee and other Native Americans work in my greenhouse nursery. Some of them are still angry at what the White man did to them.
I’d like to see you in all your self righteousness and pomp lecture these people about who was in control of this continent before the White usurpers arrived.
Yours is the typical arrogant — ‘I am better than you’ — response. As one Native American told me, the victors write history.
July 28th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
“Our colonial fore-fathers “rebelled” against Britain. “
The Texans rebelled against Mexico, fought their own War for Independence, and emerged as the independent Republic of Texas (1836-1835). The analogy to the rebellion of the British colonists in America is exact.
I agree with Isidor (whom I would readily invite to my house but would not want to live under the same roof with) that your argument for Israel by appeal to history is both flawed and unnecessary. If I can’t convince you that it is flawed, at least recognize that it is unnecessary. The point is that Israel HAS the land and HAS HAD it for forty years. Possession is nine-tenths of the law, as they say. Now quite apart from what I think Israel should do (the occupation is in no one’s best interests), the point is that, for all practical purposes, Israel does not have to do anything it does not want to do about it and the status quo will be in effect till hell freezes over.
July 28th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
1836-1845
July 28th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
“…when I see you, a worthless Texan, pass judgment on Israel, yes you are an illegal occupier and usurper”
I don’t know if I’m “worthless” but I am extremely cheap. I do know that I don’t however “pass judgement on Israel.” I am not fit to pass judgement on anybody. I would like an end to human rights abuses…on both sides and including our own. If I am an illegal occupier and usurper, the king of Spain knows where he can find me.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:51 pm
Some Native Americans remain bitter. Not the ones with the casinos.
July 29th, 2007 at 11:12 am
John wrote: “your argument for Israel by appeal to history is both flawed and unnecessary…..
Why is it flawed? As I pointed out earlier, historian, Paul Johnson cites the Deir Yassin massacre. Johnson wrote that Deir Yassin “bears scrutiny because it is relevant to the moral credentials of the Israeli state.” Doesn’t Finkelstein question the Jewish state’s moral credentials since the rise of Zionism and what Finkelstein considers to be wrongs against an indigenous people? Why shouldn’t America’s wrongs bear scrutiny? Why shouldn’t England’s wrongs bear scrutiny? Both America and England are at the forefront of lecturing the Jewish state? Why shouldn’t these two nations bear equal scrutiny?
John: “The point is that Israel HAS the land and HAS HAD it for forty years. Possession is nine-tenths of the law, as they say.”>>>>>
Israel possesses what God gave Israel possession of. For me this is non-negotiable. The difference between you and me is our interpretation of the word of God. Isador apparently does not consider God to be of any importance.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
Look at this. Evangelicals that hate Jews:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1185379029387&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
July 29th, 2007 at 1:13 pm
“Israel possesses what God gave Israel possession of. For me this is non-negotiable. The difference between you and me is our interpretation of the word of God.”
True. And that’s the problem with a claim based on religious belief. Within the community of faith what Scripture says is authoritative and non-negotiable, though there can be differences of interpretation. But since belief is voluntary, the ascription of authority is also. So religious arguments have explanatory power within a community of faith but tend not to have that power outside, though non-believers may agree with the argument for other reasons.
July 29th, 2007 at 3:02 pm
You are tragically mistaken John. Great men of history like Moses, Abraham and David, were men of great faith and vision.
Courageous men who are guided by their faith in the Almighty, who do not waver. These are the great men of history.
You apparently believe in very little men. It would appear so by your very words. Great men don’t accept these weak arguments that there can be differences of interpretation since belief is voluntary; they follow the word of God and lead.
Weak men like George W. Bush and his father make a claim to having dreams and visions and then lead the people into the abyss.
July 30th, 2007 at 10:40 am
Steve wrote in desperation:
“Isador apparently does not consider God to be of any importance.”
No. Its you that I consider of limited importance. Since you confuse your own will with that of God’s, you have made this mis assessment.
I do not believe that the various monotheistic scriptures are perfectly authored and I believe they are less perfectly translated and/or interpreted. You are entitled to your beliefs. I am equally entitled to my own. However, where the problem has always developed is regarding one person’s faith being imposed on another. To my understanding, God neither promised any land to any Jews nor did he create any superior “chosen” group of humans. If God has a chosen group (IMHO), that would be children, because children have innocence.
“Why shouldn’t America’s wrongs bear scrutiny? Why shouldn’t England’s wrongs bear scrutiny?”
Because “America” is NOT a living entity. It is a geographic location, as is England. I will often mention events which directly relate to the present problems in the M.E., such as Balfore, WW1, WW2, etc.. However, what the early while settlers did to the native Americans was done by long dead white gentry — not my people. Not my government. By your logic and same standard of thinking, the older any given country is, the more historical wrongs they would naturally have to pay for, period.
Lastly, would you please be kind enough to stop drawing outlandish conclusions — which has been going on for a while, wherein you transpose your (false) negative inferences into my mouth? (e.g. ” . . .does not consider God to be of any importance . .”, etc. etc..)
Thanks.
July 30th, 2007 at 11:51 am
I wrote: “Why shouldn’t America’s wrongs bear scrutiny? Why shouldn’t England’s wrongs bear scrutiny?”
Isador: “Because “America” is NOT a living entity. It is a geographic location, as is England. I will often mention events which directly relate to the present problems in the M.E., such as Balfour, WW1, WW2, etc.. However, what the early while settlers did to the native Americans was done by long dead white gentry — not my people. Not my government.”>>>
Come on! What are you talking about? IT WAS “NOT (your) GOVERNMENT” but something a few early white settlers did to native Americans, done by long dead white gentry — not your people?
Isador, please! I cannot believe you are writing this. That this — conquest, usurpation, colonization, despoliation, expulsion, genocide — was not US government policy? Where do you get this Isador? Who are you reading? What historian?
July 30th, 2007 at 12:46 pm
Steve:
Lets assume — for the sake of discussion that the USA was never one nation but that Ben Franklin refused to go along with legalized slavery and so there were two nations, north and south.
Then, instead of a civil war, Canada captured both and as of, say, 1873, became: “United Canada”. Would the Canadians inheret the wrongs done by the earlier colonializers who kicked the crap out of the Indians? We are not talking about a living person or even his heirs. Nor are we talking about an ongoing corporate entity. The 20th and 21st century USA is a vastly different place with vastly different people and disparate constitutional rights and new governmental representation then in Jackson’s day. I have absolutely no intention of taking any blame for rape or genocide against Indians. If you want to, be my guest, just leave me out. I can asure you that Black Americans and Spanish Americans and Asian Americans and guess what, even those whites who’s fore-fat