All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

[TrueTT]

Interpreting Taqiyya - Jane's Islamic Affairs Analyst

Another link that doesn't prove Your point?
You're suspiciously vague about answering my questions.
I would actually like some answers.

About peace agreements as strategy of Islam's holy war (Jihad),
about Islam's obligations to an oath, and about Islam's use of deception to spread religion.

I am not vague at all. I gave you specific answers on when it is permissible to lie in religions. If you want more you need to be less vague yourself and state what it is you want specifically. I am not up to playing games.

The link I used discussed some of what you are asking.

You were asked specifically about Islam.
Why? Because both of the Palestinian governments established Sharia as main source of legislation.
What does it mean? That Israelis are expected to negotiate with governments who execute gays in public under "civil law", that negotiations and agreements in such a framework are defined as only temporal until Jihad can proceed executing the obligation of forcing Sharia upon both Arabs and Jews.

The problem is the obligation to Jihad, in the strictest legal terms while Jewish law has specific boundaries where it can apply, Islamic law has no boundaries and open agenda of spreading forth.

The question regarding the obligation to oaths in Islamic law, and the obligation of a state to religious definitions of land raise many question regarding the ability of any Palestinian to negotiate any land deals.
In fact there's a question whether any state that is heavily reliant of Islamic law can have a legal framework for an actual agreement on static borders.

The question is can any of the Palestinian governments negotiate in such a framework, or should it be a broader inter-faith legal negotiation regarding Jewish recognition in Islamic world? Maybe the Palestinian governments don't have that kind of authority to start with?

I answered specifically about Islam and Islam is very specific and codified as to how Jihad can be applied, how warfare can be conducted and not conducted, etc.

I would disagree with your claim of forcing Sharia on others. Some of that seems driven by antiIslamic fear mongering around the world.

Muslim Beliefs About Sharia

The question you ask though is a very interesting one and maybe you are right. I do think, without any clear leadership on the Palestinian side it will be up to Israel and the Arab States together to come up with something. Forget the US and Europe.

Coyote You stumble me with that willful ingorance.

Let me put You in some perspective: there're 1.1% Muslims in the US.
There're about 17.2% of Israelis who are Muslims, and 55% of Israeli Jews have parents who lived in Muslim countries as dhimmis under Sharia.

Not some FOX news special, not a reality show...real dhimmis, who had to wear shoes on their shoulder when out of ghetto, those same Jews who were made BY sharia to pay triple taxes.
Those same Jews against whom was made a precedent in Your codified Jihad of how to break oaths and agreements. Those same Jews whom Islam blames for the death of their prophet.

So now go tell me what You know about Islam, You're an AMERICAN, we're ISRAELIS, we don't live somewhere "out there" where Islam/Jihad is a "liberal progressive movement" of a tiny minority of western school graduates, to present this as Islam is an insult to everyone's intelligence, which is offensive taqqiyah in its' purest form. Why is it offensive? Because the same people who pose as mainstream Muslim human rights activists are promoting Sharia and Jihad full knowingly how Sharia really operates when Islam is a majority. YOU know how Sharia operates.

We're living HERE in the mids of 99.9% of the Muslims of the world, in the same neighborhood where Islam originated and spread by sword. This is the real living and kicking Islam in all its' color in modern times. Here Jihad is daily holy war against us Jews, Yazidis, and non Muslims alike. Not some 500 years ago, but today, as we speak.

Not on FOX special, it's daily reality of a non-ending, what You call "codified" holy war.
Millions of Muslims are actually dying because of Islam's so called "codified" Jihad.

You need to change Your equation.
And You obviously didn't read that link, here's what it says:

89% Palestinians want Sharia as Law of the Land.
44% Sharia has to apply to non-Muslims
82% say converting others is a religious duty
66% death penalty for LEAVING ISLAM
84% stoning for punishment of adultery
76% for corporal punishment for theft
40% suicide bombing justified
44-46% family honor killing justifiable
48% polygamy is moral
33% say wife should be allowed to divorce her husband

These are the figures of one of the most extremist societies in the whole middle east.
That walks under the banner of 4 caliphates, who execute their own people in daylight public
and have Holy War against Jews as a public charter.

Now You're trying to tell an Iraqi-Palestinian Jew he is confused about Islam by western anti-Islam fear mongering, and You think this makes any sense?

Stop with the hypocrisy and listen - we Jews, have been suffering from Jihad and Sharia since Islam started, and we were clearly made its' main victims though...we were insignificant.

You need to change the equation, Islam is always a majority, it has no aim to stay as a minority.
Judaism has always been a minority culture, usually dominated by bigger empires, like Islam.
It's in the DNA of Judaism, we were made to exist among with others, there's no theology or commandment of a Jewish majority in the world, like in Christianity or in Islam, and even when we create a majority in a tiny sliver of land we're still a minority culture. When Islam is presented as the minority culture in the US it's not a true representation, when Jews are represented as a minority or as Israelis as a Jewish majority, we're still talking about a minority society less than that of the Muslim percentage in the US.

We had our share of Sharia, Jihad and Islam experience first hand before and after, first row in the show.
Enough to tell the rest of You folks, and that's when 1948 comes to prove a point.

I wish I USMB had a feature like upvoting so I could upvote this post to oblivion.

Chag Hannukkah Sameach, rylah. May the inbred Pisslamic filth forever fail in their quests to eliminate the JEWISH State if Israel.

 

[rylah]

Another link that doesn't prove Your point?
You're suspiciously vague about answering my questions.
I would actually like some answers.

About peace agreements as strategy of Islam's holy war (Jihad),
about Islam's obligations to an oath, and about Islam's use of deception to spread religion.

I am not vague at all. I gave you specific answers on when it is permissible to lie in religions. If you want more you need to be less vague yourself and state what it is you want specifically. I am not up to playing games.

The link I used discussed some of what you are asking.

You were asked specifically about Islam.
Why? Because both of the Palestinian governments established Sharia as main source of legislation.
What does it mean? That Israelis are expected to negotiate with governments who execute gays in public under "civil law", that negotiations and agreements in such a framework are defined as only temporal until Jihad can proceed executing the obligation of forcing Sharia upon both Arabs and Jews.

The problem is the obligation to Jihad, in the strictest legal terms while Jewish law has specific boundaries where it can apply, Islamic law has no boundaries and open agenda of spreading forth.

The question regarding the obligation to oaths in Islamic law, and the obligation of a state to religious definitions of land raise many question regarding the ability of any Palestinian to negotiate any land deals.
In fact there's a question whether any state that is heavily reliant of Islamic law can have a legal framework for an actual agreement on static borders.

The question is can any of the Palestinian governments negotiate in such a framework, or should it be a broader inter-faith legal negotiation regarding Jewish recognition in Islamic world? Maybe the Palestinian governments don't have that kind of authority to start with?

I answered specifically about Islam and Islam is very specific and codified as to how Jihad can be applied, how warfare can be conducted and not conducted, etc.

I would disagree with your claim of forcing Sharia on others. Some of that seems driven by antiIslamic fear mongering around the world.

Muslim Beliefs About Sharia

The question you ask though is a very interesting one and maybe you are right. I do think, without any clear leadership on the Palestinian side it will be up to Israel and the Arab States together to come up with something. Forget the US and Europe.

Coyote You stumble me with that willful ingorance.

Let me put You in some perspective: there're 1.1% Muslims in the US.
There're about 17.2% of Israelis who are Muslims, and 55% of Israeli Jews have parents who lived in Muslim countries as dhimmis under Sharia.

Not some FOX news special, not a reality show...real dhimmis, who had to wear shoes on their shoulder when out of ghetto, those same Jews who were made BY sharia to pay triple taxes.
Those same Jews against whom was made a precedent in Your codified Jihad of how to break oaths and agreements. Those same Jews whom Islam blames for the death of their prophet.

So now go tell me what You know about Islam, You're an AMERICAN, we're ISRAELIS, we don't live somewhere "out there" where Islam/Jihad is a "liberal progressive movement" of a tiny minority of western school graduates, to present this as Islam is an insult to everyone's intelligence, which is offensive taqqiyah in its' purest form. Why is it offensive? Because the same people who pose as mainstream Muslim human rights activists are promoting Sharia and Jihad full knowingly how Sharia really operates when Islam is a majority. YOU know how Sharia operates.

We're living HERE in the mids of 99.9% of the Muslims of the world, in the same neighborhood where Islam originated and spread by sword. This is the real living and kicking Islam in all its' color in modern times. Here Jihad is daily holy war against us Jews, Yazidis, and non Muslims alike. Not some 500 years ago, but today, as we speak.

Not on FOX special, it's daily reality of a non-ending, what You call "codified" holy war.
Millions of Muslims are actually dying because of Islam's so called "codified" Jihad.

You need to change Your equation.
And You obviously didn't read that link, here's what it says:

89% Palestinians want Sharia as Law of the Land.
44% Sharia has to apply to non-Muslims
82% say converting others is a religious duty
66% death penalty for LEAVING ISLAM
84% stoning for punishment of adultery
76% for corporal punishment for theft
40% suicide bombing justified
44-46% family honor killing justifiable
48% polygamy is moral
33% say wife should be allowed to divorce her husband

These are the figures of one of the most extremist societies in the whole middle east.
That walks under the banner of 4 caliphates, who execute their own people in daylight public
and have Holy War against Jews as a public charter.

Now You're trying to tell an Iraqi-Palestinian Jew he is confused about Islam by western anti-Islam fear mongering, and You think this makes any sense?

Stop with the hypocrisy and listen - we Jews, have been suffering from Jihad and Sharia since Islam started, and we were clearly made its' main victims though...we were insignificant.

You need to change the equation, Islam is always a majority, it has no aim to stay as a minority.
Judaism has always been a minority culture, usually dominated by bigger empires, like Islam.
It's in the DNA of Judaism, we were made to exist among with others, there's no theology or commandment of a Jewish majority in the world, like in Christianity or in Islam, and even when we create a majority in a tiny sliver of land we're still a minority culture. When Islam is presented as the minority culture in the US it's not a true representation, when Jews are represented as a minority or as Israelis as a Jewish majority, we're still talking about a minority society less than that of the Muslim percentage in the US.

We had our share of Sharia, Jihad and Islam experience first hand before and after, first row in the show.
Enough to tell the rest of You folks, and that's when 1948 comes to prove a point.

I wish I USMB had a feature like upvoting so I could upvote this post to oblivion.

Chag Hannukkah Sameach, rylah. May the inbred Pisslamic filth forever fail in their quests to eliminate the JEWISH State if Israel.

Have a good year! May it be pleasant from beginning to next beginning,
and all our enemies fight our other enemies while we succeed.

 

[rylah]

Maybe they are throwing stones for the same reasons Jewish settlers throw stones.

No they are not. Entirely my point.

Gee...I wonder why settlers stone Palestinian children on their way to school...target practice for vermin control?

"They are all enemy combatants, and their
shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

Why don't you post the entire quote, for context, rather than attempting to make equivalent things which are not equivalent. It looks an awful lot like projection to me.

Here's the whole quote:

"The Palestinian people has declared war on us, and we must respond with war. Not an operation, not a slow-moving one, not low-intensity, not controlled escalation, no destruction of terror infrastructure, no targeted killings. Enough with the oblique references. This is a war. Words have meanings. This is a war. It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started.

I don’t know why it’s so hard for us to define reality with the simple words that language puts at our disposal. Why do we have to make up a new name for the war every other week, just to avoid calling it by its name. What’s so horrifying about understanding that the entire Palestinian people is the enemy? Every war is between two peoples, and in every war the people who started the war, that whole people, is the enemy. A declaration of war is not a war crime. Responding with war certainly is not. Nor is the use of the word “war”, nor a clear definition who the enemy is. Au contraire: the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.

And the morality of war knows that it is not possible to refrain from hurting enemy civilians. It does not condemn the British air force, which bombed and totally destroyed the German city of Dresden, or the US planes that destroyed the cities of Poland and wrecked half of Budapest, places whose wretched residents had never done a thing to America, but which had to be destroyed in order to win the war against evil. The morals of war do not require that Russia be brought to trial, though it bombs and destroys towns and neighborhoods in Chechnya. It does not denounce the UN Peacekeeping Forces for killing hundreds of civilians in Angola, nor the NATO forces who bombed Milosevic’s Belgrade, a city with a million civilians, elderly, babies, women, and children. The morals of war accept as correct in principle, not only politically, what America has done in Afghanistan, including the massive bombing of populated places, including the creation of a refugee stream of hundreds of thousands of people who escaped the horrors of war, for thousands of whom there is no home to return to.

And in our war this is sevenfold more correct, because the enemy soldiers hide out among the population, and it is only through its support that they can fight. Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

While the use of the term "snakes" is abhorrent here, the concept that a war between peoples can only be conducted with the support of those peoples is a valid one. Who is "they" in your quote? The ACTORS who contribute to the war through means other than physical weapons: the imams who incite, the educators who teach, the mothers who raise martyrs, the populace who shelter and celebrate, the government which pays.

This is in NO WAY a call for "vermin control" or genocide. Nor does it reject the status of "civilian". Nor does it claim that people have no right to life. It is the recognition that there is more to war than those who hold the stones in slings or load bullets into guns and that the responsibility lies with ALL the actors. It says (eloquently until the "snakes" part) that the responsibility rests with those who bring war and that the SOLUTION to war is not to stop the guns, its to stop the support.



rylah Is there a connotation to the Hebrew word for "snake" which may be not understood by English speakers?

Sorry for answering late, snakes are snakes.
This is the same politician who pushed for execution of "Jewish terrorists", no wonder Coyote is drawn.
The quote is fro an article by Ori Elyatzor.

 

[rylah]

I doubt they put much thought of Sharia, replacement theology or much of the rest of that as they are throwing stones.

On the contrary, I believe that is exactly why they are throwing stones (and let's not forget the bullets, bombs and knives). That is their mother's milk. None of their arguments make sense without that foundation.

Balony. If they feel that the settlers are stealing their land, a feeling that is justifiable, then it absolutely makes sense. You justifying and perpetrating double standard that is hugely damaging to minors incarcerated in its system and likely helps perpetrate the violence.

If they feel like it, it's justifiable? Really?
And then You feel morally justified to blame Israel for something, right?

No I just enjoy this freak show too much...

 

[rylah]

Maybe they are throwing stones for the same reasons Jewish settlers throw stones.

No they are not. Entirely my point.

Gee...I wonder why settlers stone Palestinian children on their way to school...target practice for vermin control?

"They are all enemy combatants, and their
shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

Why don't you post the entire quote, for context, rather than attempting to make equivalent things which are not equivalent. It looks an awful lot like projection to me.

Here's the whole quote:

"The Palestinian people has declared war on us, and we must respond with war. Not an operation, not a slow-moving one, not low-intensity, not controlled escalation, no destruction of terror infrastructure, no targeted killings. Enough with the oblique references. This is a war. Words have meanings. This is a war. It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started.

I don’t know why it’s so hard for us to define reality with the simple words that language puts at our disposal. Why do we have to make up a new name for the war every other week, just to avoid calling it by its name. What’s so horrifying about understanding that the entire Palestinian people is the enemy? Every war is between two peoples, and in every war the people who started the war, that whole people, is the enemy. A declaration of war is not a war crime. Responding with war certainly is not. Nor is the use of the word “war”, nor a clear definition who the enemy is. Au contraire: the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.

And the morality of war knows that it is not possible to refrain from hurting enemy civilians. It does not condemn the British air force, which bombed and totally destroyed the German city of Dresden, or the US planes that destroyed the cities of Poland and wrecked half of Budapest, places whose wretched residents had never done a thing to America, but which had to be destroyed in order to win the war against evil. The morals of war do not require that Russia be brought to trial, though it bombs and destroys towns and neighborhoods in Chechnya. It does not denounce the UN Peacekeeping Forces for killing hundreds of civilians in Angola, nor the NATO forces who bombed Milosevic’s Belgrade, a city with a million civilians, elderly, babies, women, and children. The morals of war accept as correct in principle, not only politically, what America has done in Afghanistan, including the massive bombing of populated places, including the creation of a refugee stream of hundreds of thousands of people who escaped the horrors of war, for thousands of whom there is no home to return to.

And in our war this is sevenfold more correct, because the enemy soldiers hide out among the population, and it is only through its support that they can fight. Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

While the use of the term "snakes" is abhorrent here, the concept that a war between peoples can only be conducted with the support of those peoples is a valid one. Who is "they" in your quote? The ACTORS who contribute to the war through means other than physical weapons: the imams who incite, the educators who teach, the mothers who raise martyrs, the populace who shelter and celebrate, the government which pays.

This is in NO WAY a call for "vermin control" or genocide. Nor does it reject the status of "civilian". Nor does it claim that people have no right to life. It is the recognition that there is more to war than those who hold the stones in slings or load bullets into guns and that the responsibility lies with ALL the actors. It says (eloquently until the "snakes" part) that the responsibility rests with those who bring war and that the SOLUTION to war is not to stop the guns, its to stop the support.



rylah Is there a connotation to the Hebrew word for "snake" which may be not understood by English speakers?

This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started.

Indeed, the Palestinians should have never gone to Europe to attack the Zionists.

Au contraire: the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.

Are you saying that it is OK to send rockets into Israel?

Indeed Arabs should never have gone to so many places to attack the Jews.
That nephew of an SS Palestinian Mufti should be on the list.
Indeed their whole family should have been given the rope with Eichmann.

If Arabs were forced to start paying for all property they've stolen from Israelis, they'd eventually end up giving us the keys to their worthless palaces and still not cover it, and that's after we include both sides of the river into the equation.

Wanna start counting?

 

[rylah]

RE: All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ Coyote, et al,

With any large culture or segment of people, there are subsets that one or more show definite separate and distinct attributes and characteristics. The Jewish "Settlers" of the West Bank fall into this category with malevolent and unkindly attributes and definite negative characteristics.

Why do settlers stone Palestinian kids trying to go to school?

(COMMENT)

I do not think that there is any question, that the vast majority for all Israelis (Jewish or otherwise) find the behavior of these Jewish "Settlers" of the West Bank to be abhorrent and unacceptable; → maybe even a bit ashamed by it. And this shame may be the reason that the Israelis don't talk about them. They want to disassociate themselves for this poorly disciplined aspect of their society.

Most Respectfully,
R

Some posters insist in picking an extremely small group of Jews who have been harassed and attacked endlessly and have had enough of it and are giving back what they have been given.

It is preferable that they would not act as the Arabs do, but 98 years of Arab attacks, rapes, dismemberment, expulsions, murders of Jews does finally hit some Jews in Israel and in Judea and Samaria and they say enough and start acting on their own in the bad way we see.

The number of times some Jews have attacked Arabs is extremely low when one looks at the endless attacks by Arabs on Jews.

We are not seeing Jews with cars, screw drivers, knives, molotovs, etc going out right after we hear it in the news and do to the Arabs what is constantly being done to the Jews.

There has not been one fiery or explosive balloon sent to Gaza or Areas A and B by any Jews.

As it has been reminded, it is a war.
It has been going on since 1920 when the Husseini Clan decided to start riots threatening all Jews in Mandate Palestine.

Many in the Haredi, and other religious groups, seem to be behind the attacks on Arabs, but it is not because they have not constantly experienced being attacked themselves and being constantly told that they have "stolen" Arab land, when it is the Jews who were expelled from this historical Jewish land of Judea and Samaria in 1948 and everything, land, schools, homes, businesses, etc, stolen from them by the Hashemite Arabs.

And let us not forget, that after Jews were expelled by their own government in 2005 from Gaza and cities in Judea and Samaria, the Arab leaders and the population only see more possibilities of taking more land from the Jews.

Why? Because they are not Muslims.

Because the Arabs managed to get 80% of the Mandate for Palestine designed for the re-creation of the Jewish State, and will never be happy until the other 20% is also in Arab/Muslim hands.

When Muslims accuse the land of being stolen, they are only referring to the fact that the land used to be in Muslim hands, and they want it all to be in Muslim hands, it does not matter which Arab tribe gets it.

But Jews, as we all know, according to Islam, does not have the right to be sovereign over any part of once conquered Muslim land.

Since 1920. It is a WAR. It continues to be the Muslim war against the Jewish rights to be sovereign over any part of their ancient homeland.

Israel does its part, even if not always, in punishing crimes.
Hamas gives candies. The PA, like Hamas, names streets, parks, etc after any Arab who kills Jews.

Jews are not seen as humans. They follow the teachings and repeat constantly that Jews are Ape and Pigs. And that one must remember the Arabian Jewish tribe which was decapitated and turn to slavery, in Khaybar. How those Jews were defeated, is how today's Jews must be defeated.

That is the war Israel faces. That is the level of education in the Arab communities Jews face on a daily basis.

Jewish culture and education is what keeps many more Jews from doing exactly to the Arabs what the Arabs keep doing to the Jews.

It is an "extremely small group of Jews" with an extremely large political voice and base of support in the government. It is a group who are making it extremely difficult to make a peaceful resolution of that area and maintain peace in that area. But keep deflecting onto broader issues and excusing it. Nothing will change because that is exactly what keeps happening. One side gets excused and the other condemned.

Apes,pigs,snakes and locusts.

Actually it's the only group that is making any significant progress in peaceful resolution.
Was there any other government so successful with the Arab world?

 

[rylah]

RE: All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ Sixties Fan, et al,

Sometimes the obvious is not what it appears to be; especially in the Middle East.

(COMMENT)

I agree, the article is well worth the time to read.

While I think that even a nickel spent on anything in Gaza is a perversion towards humanity (direct material support to terrorism), the half-million dollars is not an especially large propaganda expenditure in an effort to spread the word (any word). In the last decade, the Arab Palestinians in the state of unknown whereabouts, have become very effective in the use of political and economic coercion and the propaganda in the arena of legalizing jihadism, insurgent activity, radicalized Islamic murder, supports to Arab Palestinian cause, gaining political support in the targeting of civilian Jews, promotion of guerrilla activities and asymmetric operations against Israel.

(COMMENT)

This is a trick question...

No Arab Nation, including the Arab Higher Committee and the PLO Arab Palestinians, accepted the status of 'corpus separatum' for Jerusalem. It was maintained by the Jordanians from 1948 (becoming sovereign in 1950) until 1967. It became occupied Jordanian territory (oJt) in 1967 and maintained that status up and until October 1988; when it was abandoned (terra nullius) and fell into the hands of the Israelis.

It was never sovereign under Arab Palestinian rule (possessing ultimate political power).

The Arab Palestinians argue that the Jordanian Annexation of 1950 was illegal. That makes no real difference. In order for East Jerusalem to have been occupied Palestinian territory, it had to be (at some time since the termination of the Mandate) Arab Palestinians sovereign (which it never was).

OK, I have my ceramic plates and kevlar on --- fire at will.

Most Respectfully,
R

I would say there is certainly conserable investment in pro-Isreali propoganda, far more than pro Palestinian. Israel has a poweful lobby in the US and has for decades. They have gotten considerable financisl and military support. They have used that propaganda to control key narratives, for example:

That the majority of palestinians whoo fled and were sibsequently exiled, did so at the urging of Arab leaders, yet the (relatively) recent) release of historical documents show that to be largely a lie. Most of those who fled did so either out of fear of conflict or were driven out by Jewish militias.

Another narrative driven by propaganda is the ides thst Istael is some kind of victim .In thid conflict. While thr Palestinians are sore losers of a conflict they started,lost,and cant move on from, Israel had itls own political aims in the conflict. It needed land, it wanyrd land, it got land. There are historians who have said Israel set the stage for a conflict withth Egypt in order to be able to gain teritory.

That is all in the pastnow but propaganda still pushes the victim narrative. No nation as well armed and protected as Israel is a victim.

"That the majority of Palestinians whoo fled and were subsequently exiled, did so at the urging of Arab leaders,"

TRUE

You do not have to believe in it, if you do not want to but Arabs have testified to that.

And YES, all of those who stayed and fought against Israel, either died in the fight or had to be expelled from Israel. What country would allow hostile people to stay and continue to attack its population?

Israel's only aim is Peace with its neighbors as it has achieved with Egypt and Jordan.

It needed land, are we talking 1967 now? And it got land?
Israel did not start the 1948 war, where it lost land, nor did it start the 1967 war, where it ended getting Gaza and Judea, Samaria and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem back.

It just happened that Israel was much stronger this time, and knew how to fight to win, with much fewer casualties than in 1948.

"Historians say". What? Do you not have a mind of your own and can you NOT tell History from non History?

There is HISTORY, period. It means what happened at a certain point in time at a certain place.

NOT, what some people would like others to believe happened.

Now, How are YOU going to be able to tell one from the other?

Thete id history and there is propaganda. Every nation does it.

And I continue to wait for specifics on it and not your generalizations.
Generalizations you read someplace without being able to tell if it is true or not.

Unless a country is strong, tribe, village, etc it has always been defeated by the stronger ones. Ask the Kurds about it who have had to fight the Arabs and continue to have Turkey imposing them from achieving Independence in the same region.

When strong Israel retained territory and protected it's people from its enemies.
When weak, Israel Lost sovereignty and was at the hands of its conquerors.

So yes, Israel has to be strong today knowing very well what its enemies want to do wit it and its population. The Muslims have been very clear about it for the past 98 years.

Victim, how has it not been a victim of 7 Arab countries attacking it in1948, and all the attacks before and after.

How is the Jewish population not victimized on an almost daily basis wit knives, screws, cars, rocks, molotov, just because Israel now has a stronger army which keeps the enemy from a full fledged attack, as in 1948.

Maybe you are not aware of it but Turkey, Iran, the Palestinians, just about every one, the NRA, etc have lobbies in DC. So, why shouldn't Israel have one as well.
Does it mean that Israel gets all it wants. Of course not.

I never said Israel is the only one with a lobby, just that theirs is extremely powerful, much more so than the Palestinian one.

Have You ever thought that it might to do with the Palestinian lobby trying to sell Sharia as feminism?
Either were're extremely powerful or someone is exceedingly dumb.

Whenever You guys sell the Protocols with that serious look on Your face, it just proves the later.
It's the Palestinians with a Swastika on their flag teach the world about racism and homeland security of western countries, with a smug face on BBC, while running most abusive regimes on earth.

Maybe it's that "oh Zionist magic" or maybe , I don't know, maybe we just live in the same century as most Americans, and the other side has nothing to offer except for ending oil and stubborn degradation?

Wonder why "scary racist" Israel reached it's record of tourism from all over the world this year, while the Arab states reach out to Israel to grasp with the reality of the last 5 decades, for re-branding (aka to climb from that tree)?

Something Palestinian Arabs should reconsider if they want to regain any of their previous political weight in the middle east.

 

[Coyote]

Interpreting Taqiyya - Jane's Islamic Affairs Analyst

Another link that doesn't prove Your point?
You're suspiciously vague about answering my questions.
I would actually like some answers.

About peace agreements as strategy of Islam's holy war (Jihad),
about Islam's obligations to an oath, and about Islam's use of deception to spread religion.

I am not vague at all. I gave you specific answers on when it is permissible to lie in religions. If you want more you need to be less vague yourself and state what it is you want specifically. I am not up to playing games.

The link I used discussed some of what you are asking.

You were asked specifically about Islam.
Why? Because both of the Palestinian governments established Sharia as main source of legislation.
What does it mean? That Israelis are expected to negotiate with governments who execute gays in public under "civil law", that negotiations and agreements in such a framework are defined as only temporal until Jihad can proceed executing the obligation of forcing Sharia upon both Arabs and Jews.

The problem is the obligation to Jihad, in the strictest legal terms while Jewish law has specific boundaries where it can apply, Islamic law has no boundaries and open agenda of spreading forth.

The question regarding the obligation to oaths in Islamic law, and the obligation of a state to religious definitions of land raise many question regarding the ability of any Palestinian to negotiate any land deals.
In fact there's a question whether any state that is heavily reliant of Islamic law can have a legal framework for an actual agreement on static borders.

The question is can any of the Palestinian governments negotiate in such a framework, or should it be a broader inter-faith legal negotiation regarding Jewish recognition in Islamic world? Maybe the Palestinian governments don't have that kind of authority to start with?

I answered specifically about Islam and Islam is very specific and codified as to how Jihad can be applied, how warfare can be conducted and not conducted, etc.

I would disagree with your claim of forcing Sharia on others. Some of that seems driven by antiIslamic fear mongering around the world.

Muslim Beliefs About Sharia

The question you ask though is a very interesting one and maybe you are right. I do think, without any clear leadership on the Palestinian side it will be up to Israel and the Arab States together to come up with something. Forget the US and Europe.

Coyote You stumble me with that willful ingorance.

Let me put You in some perspective: there're 1.1% Muslims in the US.
There're about 17.2% of Israelis who are Muslims, and 55% of Israeli Jews have parents who lived in Muslim countries as dhimmis under Sharia.

Not some FOX news special, not a reality show...real dhimmis, who had to wear shoes on their shoulder when out of ghetto, those same Jews who were made BY sharia to pay triple taxes.
Those same Jews against whom was made a precedent in Your codified Jihad of how to break oaths and agreements. Those same Jews whom Islam blames for the death of their prophet.

So now go tell me what You know about Islam, You're an AMERICAN, we're ISRAELIS, we don't live somewhere "out there" where Islam/Jihad is a "liberal progressive movement" of a tiny minority of western school graduates, to present this as Islam is an insult to everyone's intelligence, which is offensive taqqiyah in its' purest form. Why is it offensive? Because the same people who pose as mainstream Muslim human rights activists are promoting Sharia and Jihad full knowingly how Sharia really operates when Islam is a majority. YOU know how Sharia operates.

We're living HERE in the mids of 99.9% of the Muslims of the world, in the same neighborhood where Islam originated and spread by sword. This is the real living and kicking Islam in all its' color in modern times. Here Jihad is daily holy war against us Jews, Yazidis, and non Muslims alike. Not some 500 years ago, but today, as we speak.

Not on FOX special, it's daily reality of a non-ending, what You call "codified" holy war.
Millions of Muslims are actually dying because of Islam's so called "codified" Jihad.

You need to change Your equation.
And You obviously didn't read that link, here's what it says:

89% Palestinians want Sharia as Law of the Land.
44% Sharia has to apply to non-Muslims
82% say converting others is a religious duty
66% death penalty for LEAVING ISLAM
84% stoning for punishment of adultery
76% for corporal punishment for theft
40% suicide bombing justified
44-46% family honor killing justifiable
48% polygamy is moral
33% say wife should be allowed to divorce her husband

These are the figures of one of the most extremist societies in the whole middle east.
That walks under the banner of 4 caliphates, who execute their own people in daylight public
and have Holy War against Jews as a public charter.

Now You're trying to tell an Iraqi-Palestinian Jew he is confused about Islam by western anti-Islam fear mongering, and You think this makes any sense?

Stop with the hypocrisy and listen - we Jews, have been suffering from Jihad and Sharia since Islam started, and we were clearly made its' main victims though...we were insignificant.

You need to change the equation, Islam is always a majority, it has no aim to stay as a minority.
Judaism has always been a minority culture, usually dominated by bigger empires, like Islam.
It's in the DNA of Judaism, we were made to exist among with others, there's no theology or commandment of a Jewish majority in the world, like in Christianity or in Islam, and even when we create a majority in a tiny sliver of land we're still a minority culture. When Islam is presented as the minority culture in the US it's not a true representation, when Jews are represented as a minority or as Israelis as a Jewish majority, we're still talking about a minority society less than that of the Muslim percentage in the US.

We had our share of Sharia, Jihad and Islam experience first hand before and after, first row in the show.
Enough to tell the rest of You folks, and that's when 1948 comes to prove a point.

The fact that you are Israeli may color your own bias in how you view Taqiya. Are you suggesting Islam is the same the world over, that Muslims in America want Sharia to be the law of the land? If so...then I suggest that goes into the same basket as the Jewish canards.

 

[Coyote]

I would say there is certainly conserable investment in pro-Isreali propoganda, far more than pro Palestinian. Israel has a poweful lobby in the US and has for decades. They have gotten considerable financisl and military support. They have used that propaganda to control key narratives, for example:

That the majority of palestinians whoo fled and were sibsequently exiled, did so at the urging of Arab leaders, yet the (relatively) recent) release of historical documents show that to be largely a lie. Most of those who fled did so either out of fear of conflict or were driven out by Jewish militias.

Another narrative driven by propaganda is the ides thst Istael is some kind of victim .In thid conflict. While thr Palestinians are sore losers of a conflict they started,lost,and cant move on from, Israel had itls own political aims in the conflict. It needed land, it wanyrd land, it got land. There are historians who have said Israel set the stage for a conflict withth Egypt in order to be able to gain teritory.

That is all in the pastnow but propaganda still pushes the victim narrative. No nation as well armed and protected as Israel is a victim.

"That the majority of Palestinians whoo fled and were subsequently exiled, did so at the urging of Arab leaders,"

TRUE

You do not have to believe in it, if you do not want to but Arabs have testified to that.

And YES, all of those who stayed and fought against Israel, either died in the fight or had to be expelled from Israel. What country would allow hostile people to stay and continue to attack its population?

Israel's only aim is Peace with its neighbors as it has achieved with Egypt and Jordan.

It needed land, are we talking 1967 now? And it got land?
Israel did not start the 1948 war, where it lost land, nor did it start the 1967 war, where it ended getting Gaza and Judea, Samaria and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem back.

It just happened that Israel was much stronger this time, and knew how to fight to win, with much fewer casualties than in 1948.

"Historians say". What? Do you not have a mind of your own and can you NOT tell History from non History?

There is HISTORY, period. It means what happened at a certain point in time at a certain place.

NOT, what some people would like others to believe happened.

Now, How are YOU going to be able to tell one from the other?

Thete id history and there is propaganda. Every nation does it.

And I continue to wait for specifics on it and not your generalizations.
Generalizations you read someplace without being able to tell if it is true or not.

Unless a country is strong, tribe, village, etc it has always been defeated by the stronger ones. Ask the Kurds about it who have had to fight the Arabs and continue to have Turkey imposing them from achieving Independence in the same region.

When strong Israel retained territory and protected it's people from its enemies.
When weak, Israel Lost sovereignty and was at the hands of its conquerors.

So yes, Israel has to be strong today knowing very well what its enemies want to do wit it and its population. The Muslims have been very clear about it for the past 98 years.

Victim, how has it not been a victim of 7 Arab countries attacking it in1948, and all the attacks before and after.

How is the Jewish population not victimized on an almost daily basis wit knives, screws, cars, rocks, molotov, just because Israel now has a stronger army which keeps the enemy from a full fledged attack, as in 1948.

Maybe you are not aware of it but Turkey, Iran, the Palestinians, just about every one, the NRA, etc have lobbies in DC. So, why shouldn't Israel have one as well.
Does it mean that Israel gets all it wants. Of course not.

I never said Israel is the only one with a lobby, just that theirs is extremely powerful, much more so than the Palestinian one.

Have You ever thought that it might to do with the Palestinian lobby trying to sell Sharia as feminism?
Either were're extremely powerful or someone is exceedingly dumb.

Whenever You guys sell the Protocols with that serious look on Your face, it just proves the later.
It's the Palestinians with a Swastika on their flag teaching the world about racism and homeland security of western countries, with a smug face on BBC, and accusing others of apartheid while running one of the worst Islamist regimes on earth.

I have never heard Sharia sold as feminism. I do however see how much more powerful the Israeli lobby is in shaping policy in the US than any Palestinian lobby.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Earlier this month, the head of the Church of England wrote in the Sunday Telegraphthat millions of Middle Eastern Christians are on the verge of “imminent extinction.”

“In the birthplace of our faith, the community faces extinction,” Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby wrote, calling it “the worst situation since the Mongol invasions of the 13th century.”

Christians face government harassment in Egypt, leading them to emigrate in record numbers.

Lebanese Christians fear Hezbollah’s growing power in their country, along with an influx of Syrian refugees. Turkish Christians are also facing oppression by their government. And in Iraq, the Christian population has been nearly wiped out, but those remaining are trying to rebuild their lives.

Closer to home, the Christian Palestinian population is in a constant downward trend.

Christians have long been fleeing Palestinian-controlled areas in light of systemic abuse. Terrorists affiliated with then-PLO leader Yasser Arafat famously raided and trashed the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem in 2002, holding monks hostage.

Last year, Christians were only 2% of the Palestinian population in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, less than half their numbers a generation ago.

In 1950 in Bethlehem, Jesus’s birthplace, 86% residents were Christians. In 2017, they were only 12%.

In Gaza, there were 6,000 Christians when Hamas took control in 2006, but as of 2016, there were only 1,100. Hamas has murdered Palestinian Christians for their faith, and commandeered the Gaza Baptist Church for combat, because it’s one of the tallest buildings in Gaza City.

Despite this, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas still claims to be a defender of Christians and the Palestinian leadership on the whole thinks it ought to control Christian holy sites – all the while denying history at those sites.

(full article online)

Merry Christmas

 

[Coyote]

Maybe they are throwing stones for the same reasons Jewish settlers throw stones.

No they are not. Entirely my point.

Gee...I wonder why settlers stone Palestinian children on their way to school...target practice for vermin control?

"They are all enemy combatants, and their
shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

Why don't you post the entire quote, for context, rather than attempting to make equivalent things which are not equivalent. It looks an awful lot like projection to me.

Here's the whole quote:

"The Palestinian people has declared war on us, and we must respond with war. Not an operation, not a slow-moving one, not low-intensity, not controlled escalation, no destruction of terror infrastructure, no targeted killings. Enough with the oblique references. This is a war. Words have meanings. This is a war. It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started.

I don’t know why it’s so hard for us to define reality with the simple words that language puts at our disposal. Why do we have to make up a new name for the war every other week, just to avoid calling it by its name. What’s so horrifying about understanding that the entire Palestinian people is the enemy? Every war is between two peoples, and in every war the people who started the war, that whole people, is the enemy. A declaration of war is not a war crime. Responding with war certainly is not. Nor is the use of the word “war”, nor a clear definition who the enemy is. Au contraire: the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.

And the morality of war knows that it is not possible to refrain from hurting enemy civilians. It does not condemn the British air force, which bombed and totally destroyed the German city of Dresden, or the US planes that destroyed the cities of Poland and wrecked half of Budapest, places whose wretched residents had never done a thing to America, but which had to be destroyed in order to win the war against evil. The morals of war do not require that Russia be brought to trial, though it bombs and destroys towns and neighborhoods in Chechnya. It does not denounce the UN Peacekeeping Forces for killing hundreds of civilians in Angola, nor the NATO forces who bombed Milosevic’s Belgrade, a city with a million civilians, elderly, babies, women, and children. The morals of war accept as correct in principle, not only politically, what America has done in Afghanistan, including the massive bombing of populated places, including the creation of a refugee stream of hundreds of thousands of people who escaped the horrors of war, for thousands of whom there is no home to return to.

And in our war this is sevenfold more correct, because the enemy soldiers hide out among the population, and it is only through its support that they can fight. Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

While the use of the term "snakes" is abhorrent here, the concept that a war between peoples can only be conducted with the support of those peoples is a valid one. Who is "they" in your quote? The ACTORS who contribute to the war through means other than physical weapons: the imams who incite, the educators who teach, the mothers who raise martyrs, the populace who shelter and celebrate, the government which pays.

This is in NO WAY a call for "vermin control" or genocide. Nor does it reject the status of "civilian". Nor does it claim that people have no right to life. It is the recognition that there is more to war than those who hold the stones in slings or load bullets into guns and that the responsibility lies with ALL the actors. It says (eloquently until the "snakes" part) that the responsibility rests with those who bring war and that the SOLUTION to war is not to stop the guns, its to stop the support.



rylah Is there a connotation to the Hebrew word for "snake" which may be not understood by English speakers?

Sorry for answering late, snakes are snakes.
This is the same politician who pushed for execution of "Jewish terrorists", no wonder Coyote is drawn.
The quote is fro an article by Ori Elyatzor.

What do you mean I am drawn? I am unequivocally opposed to the death penalty (unlike you, I participate outside of IP). I am opposed regardless of whether per one is black or white, Jewish or Muslim.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Purportedly dedicated to “adversarial journalism,” whose “prime target is the US intelligence apparatus,” Glenn Greenwald’s Intercept, according to one commentator, “makes no pretense of being a neutral news organization … its one-sidedness is so flagrant and relentless that it easily traverses the line separating argumentation from propaganda.”

That is true in many areas. Greenwald blames the United States and its allies for the existence of Islamic terrorism, and claims that the 9/11 attacks are used as a pretext to violate Americans’ civil liberties. He also says that the FBI acts to create and encourage crimes by Muslims, and minimizes the importance of numerous prosecutions against Islamists in the United States, often omitting facts about defendants in his essays.

Among Greenwald’s most egregious claims, he has:

1. Justified the murder of Fort Hood soldiers by Nidal Hasan and the murder of British soldier Lee Rigby by an Islamic terrorist.
2. Justified murders committed by ISIS and Al Qaeda.
3. Justified the killing of Israeli civilians by Hamas and Hezbollah.
4. Denounced Israel, not Iran, as the “bogeyman” in the Middle East, claiming that Israel is a major terror actor.
5. Likened US actions in Iraq to the Nazi seizures of Austria and Czechoslovakia.
6. Accused the US military of deliberately targeting Muslim civilians instead of targeting actual terrorists.
7. Characterized the terrorists held at Guantanamo as patriots who were merely defending their lands from foreign invasion.
8. Claimed that officials declare an act to be terrorism only when Muslims commit it, rather than when non-Muslims are the perpetrators.
9. Claimed that the FBI is targeting Islamist terrorists and simply framing Muslims.
10. Claimed fancifully that the US media uncritically parrots US government claims.
11. Charged writers and thinkers who criticize Islam with an “anti-Muslim animus.”
12. Claimed that criticism of Palestinian terrorism leaves the Palestinians with no options to fight Israel’s “occupation.”
13. Charged that accusations of antisemitism are just ploys to shut down criticism of Israel.
14. Denounced the US killing of jihad terror mastermind Anwar al-Awlaki.
15. Sided with Marc Lamont Hill and justified his genocidal call “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”

Greenwald has also participated in numerous conferences and events sponsored by US Islamist organizations, such as Hamas front the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

(full article online)

Glenn Greenwald’s Web of Propaganda

 

[Sixties Fan]

From the very beginning, the piece is rife with exaggeration and riddled with inaccuracy. Early on, Franke makes a particularly egregious claim – that “the US Department of Education recently adopted a new definition of anti-Semitism, one that equates any criticism of Israel with a hatred of Jews.” This, quite simply, is untrue.
-------
Even before making the aforementioned claim, Franke suggests that wondering aloud whether the US should question its diplomatic and financial support for Israel was “unsayable” until now. This too is demonstrably false. Over a decade ago, famed academics John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt published the book “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” to great acclaim and profit. The notorious bookdepicted America’s pro-Israel lobby as being the prime motivator behind American policy in the Middle East, while repeatedly failing to document the extent of the Arab lobby and the advancing of Arab interests.

Franke goes on to claim that Arab-American graduate students would be “prevented from applying” to study at an Israeli academic institution. Indeed, she goes on to add:

(full article online)

Columbia Professor Dishonestly Smears Israel | HonestReporting

 

[rylah]

Another link that doesn't prove Your point?
You're suspiciously vague about answering my questions.
I would actually like some answers.

About peace agreements as strategy of Islam's holy war (Jihad),
about Islam's obligations to an oath, and about Islam's use of deception to spread religion.

I am not vague at all. I gave you specific answers on when it is permissible to lie in religions. If you want more you need to be less vague yourself and state what it is you want specifically. I am not up to playing games.

The link I used discussed some of what you are asking.

You were asked specifically about Islam.
Why? Because both of the Palestinian governments established Sharia as main source of legislation.
What does it mean? That Israelis are expected to negotiate with governments who execute gays in public under "civil law", that negotiations and agreements in such a framework are defined as only temporal until Jihad can proceed executing the obligation of forcing Sharia upon both Arabs and Jews.

The problem is the obligation to Jihad, in the strictest legal terms while Jewish law has specific boundaries where it can apply, Islamic law has no boundaries and open agenda of spreading forth.

The question regarding the obligation to oaths in Islamic law, and the obligation of a state to religious definitions of land raise many question regarding the ability of any Palestinian to negotiate any land deals.
In fact there's a question whether any state that is heavily reliant of Islamic law can have a legal framework for an actual agreement on static borders.

The question is can any of the Palestinian governments negotiate in such a framework, or should it be a broader inter-faith legal negotiation regarding Jewish recognition in Islamic world? Maybe the Palestinian governments don't have that kind of authority to start with?

I answered specifically about Islam and Islam is very specific and codified as to how Jihad can be applied, how warfare can be conducted and not conducted, etc.

I would disagree with your claim of forcing Sharia on others. Some of that seems driven by antiIslamic fear mongering around the world.

Muslim Beliefs About Sharia

The question you ask though is a very interesting one and maybe you are right. I do think, without any clear leadership on the Palestinian side it will be up to Israel and the Arab States together to come up with something. Forget the US and Europe.

Coyote You stumble me with that willful ingorance.

Let me put You in some perspective: there're 1.1% Muslims in the US.
There're about 17.2% of Israelis who are Muslims, and 55% of Israeli Jews have parents who lived in Muslim countries as dhimmis under Sharia.

Not some FOX news special, not a reality show...real dhimmis, who had to wear shoes on their shoulder when out of ghetto, those same Jews who were made BY sharia to pay triple taxes.
Those same Jews against whom was made a precedent in Your codified Jihad of how to break oaths and agreements. Those same Jews whom Islam blames for the death of their prophet.

So now go tell me what You know about Islam, You're an AMERICAN, we're ISRAELIS, we don't live somewhere "out there" where Islam/Jihad is a "liberal progressive movement" of a tiny minority of western school graduates, to present this as Islam is an insult to everyone's intelligence, which is offensive taqqiyah in its' purest form. Why is it offensive? Because the same people who pose as mainstream Muslim human rights activists are promoting Sharia and Jihad full knowingly how Sharia really operates when Islam is a majority. YOU know how Sharia operates.

We're living HERE in the mids of 99.9% of the Muslims of the world, in the same neighborhood where Islam originated and spread by sword. This is the real living and kicking Islam in all its' color in modern times. Here Jihad is daily holy war against us Jews, Yazidis, and non Muslims alike. Not some 500 years ago, but today, as we speak.

Not on FOX special, it's daily reality of a non-ending, what You call "codified" holy war.
Millions of Muslims are actually dying because of Islam's so called "codified" Jihad.

You need to change Your equation.
And You obviously didn't read that link, here's what it says:

89% Palestinians want Sharia as Law of the Land.
44% Sharia has to apply to non-Muslims
82% say converting others is a religious duty
66% death penalty for LEAVING ISLAM
84% stoning for punishment of adultery
76% for corporal punishment for theft
40% suicide bombing justified
44-46% family honor killing justifiable
48% polygamy is moral
33% say wife should be allowed to divorce her husband

These are the figures of one of the most extremist societies in the whole middle east.
That walks under the banner of 4 caliphates, who execute their own people in daylight public
and have Holy War against Jews as a public charter.

Now You're trying to tell an Iraqi-Palestinian Jew he is confused about Islam by western anti-Islam fear mongering, and You think this makes any sense?

Stop with the hypocrisy and listen - we Jews, have been suffering from Jihad and Sharia since Islam started, and we were clearly made its' main victims though...we were insignificant.

You need to change the equation, Islam is always a majority, it has no aim to stay as a minority.
Judaism has always been a minority culture, usually dominated by bigger empires, like Islam.
It's in the DNA of Judaism, we were made to exist among with others, there's no theology or commandment of a Jewish majority in the world, like in Christianity or in Islam, and even when we create a majority in a tiny sliver of land we're still a minority culture. When Islam is presented as the minority culture in the US it's not a true representation, when Jews are represented as a minority or as Israelis as a Jewish majority, we're still talking about a minority society less than that of the Muslim percentage in the US.

We had our share of Sharia, Jihad and Islam experience first hand before and after, first row in the show.
Enough to tell the rest of You folks, and that's when 1948 comes to prove a point.

The fact that you are Israeli may color your own bias in how you view Taqiya. Are you suggesting Islam is the same the world over, that Muslims in America want Sharia to be the law of the land? If so...then I suggest that goes into the same basket as the Jewish canards.

Taqqiya is what You're doing for as long as I've pointed to specific aspects of Islamic law,
since then You've been evading, deflecting, presenting strawmen and telling me about some westernized version of Your Muslim hip progressive friends.

I'm saying that Jihad started as a holy war against Jews, never ended.
Your link says Palestinians are one of the top 3 most abusive Islamic societies on earth.
Your link says Palestinians are among the most abusive societies towards women.
Your link says majority of Palestinians see murder as a solution for apostasy and family matters
Your link says that 600,000,000 justify suicide bombing compared to "only" 700,000 American Muslims.


Your link says You're full of it- no other culture has these numbers screaming this story so loudly.
YOU KNOW how Sharia operates in action, You know how Jihad operates, You know that "Palestine" means a holy war against Jews yet You play the PC act -because Your chosen "underdog hero" is one of the most abusive societies on earth.

Go convince someone else that Swastika on the Palestinian flag is merely a "sun symbol", or that Jihad and Sharia are mere invitations to a wine and cheese party where Jews and Christians are not the main meal.

 

[rylah]

"That the majority of Palestinians whoo fled and were subsequently exiled, did so at the urging of Arab leaders,"

TRUE

You do not have to believe in it, if you do not want to but Arabs have testified to that.

And YES, all of those who stayed and fought against Israel, either died in the fight or had to be expelled from Israel. What country would allow hostile people to stay and continue to attack its population?

Israel's only aim is Peace with its neighbors as it has achieved with Egypt and Jordan.

It needed land, are we talking 1967 now? And it got land?
Israel did not start the 1948 war, where it lost land, nor did it start the 1967 war, where it ended getting Gaza and Judea, Samaria and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem back.

It just happened that Israel was much stronger this time, and knew how to fight to win, with much fewer casualties than in 1948.

"Historians say". What? Do you not have a mind of your own and can you NOT tell History from non History?

There is HISTORY, period. It means what happened at a certain point in time at a certain place.

NOT, what some people would like others to believe happened.

Now, How are YOU going to be able to tell one from the other?

Thete id history and there is propaganda. Every nation does it.

And I continue to wait for specifics on it and not your generalizations.
Generalizations you read someplace without being able to tell if it is true or not.

Unless a country is strong, tribe, village, etc it has always been defeated by the stronger ones. Ask the Kurds about it who have had to fight the Arabs and continue to have Turkey imposing them from achieving Independence in the same region.

When strong Israel retained territory and protected it's people from its enemies.
When weak, Israel Lost sovereignty and was at the hands of its conquerors.

So yes, Israel has to be strong today knowing very well what its enemies want to do wit it and its population. The Muslims have been very clear about it for the past 98 years.

Victim, how has it not been a victim of 7 Arab countries attacking it in1948, and all the attacks before and after.

How is the Jewish population not victimized on an almost daily basis wit knives, screws, cars, rocks, molotov, just because Israel now has a stronger army which keeps the enemy from a full fledged attack, as in 1948.

Maybe you are not aware of it but Turkey, Iran, the Palestinians, just about every one, the NRA, etc have lobbies in DC. So, why shouldn't Israel have one as well.
Does it mean that Israel gets all it wants. Of course not.

I never said Israel is the only one with a lobby, just that theirs is extremely powerful, much more so than the Palestinian one.

Have You ever thought that it might to do with the Palestinian lobby trying to sell Sharia as feminism?
Either were're extremely powerful or someone is exceedingly dumb.

Whenever You guys sell the Protocols with that serious look on Your face, it just proves the later.
It's the Palestinians with a Swastika on their flag teaching the world about racism and homeland security of western countries, with a smug face on BBC, and accusing others of apartheid while running one of the worst Islamist regimes on earth.

I have never heard Sharia sold as feminism. I do however see how much more powerful the Israeli lobby is in shaping policy in the US than any Palestinian lobby.

Do You happen to know a famous American Muslim "feminist" who both uses the most abusive misogynistic attacks against her female opponents, and promotes Sharia and Jihad, is it any coincidence she is also the most sleazy Jew hater on the US market who poses as a "Palestinian"?

Would it be more grotesque if I told You Your progressive hero's feminist surname means "a pimp"?

Palestinians and their supporters- You simply cant make this shit up.

 

[rylah]

Maybe they are throwing stones for the same reasons Jewish settlers throw stones.

No they are not. Entirely my point.

Gee...I wonder why settlers stone Palestinian children on their way to school...target practice for vermin control?

"They are all enemy combatants, and their
shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

Why don't you post the entire quote, for context, rather than attempting to make equivalent things which are not equivalent. It looks an awful lot like projection to me.

Here's the whole quote:

"The Palestinian people has declared war on us, and we must respond with war. Not an operation, not a slow-moving one, not low-intensity, not controlled escalation, no destruction of terror infrastructure, no targeted killings. Enough with the oblique references. This is a war. Words have meanings. This is a war. It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started.

I don’t know why it’s so hard for us to define reality with the simple words that language puts at our disposal. Why do we have to make up a new name for the war every other week, just to avoid calling it by its name. What’s so horrifying about understanding that the entire Palestinian people is the enemy? Every war is between two peoples, and in every war the people who started the war, that whole people, is the enemy. A declaration of war is not a war crime. Responding with war certainly is not. Nor is the use of the word “war”, nor a clear definition who the enemy is. Au contraire: the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.

And the morality of war knows that it is not possible to refrain from hurting enemy civilians. It does not condemn the British air force, which bombed and totally destroyed the German city of Dresden, or the US planes that destroyed the cities of Poland and wrecked half of Budapest, places whose wretched residents had never done a thing to America, but which had to be destroyed in order to win the war against evil. The morals of war do not require that Russia be brought to trial, though it bombs and destroys towns and neighborhoods in Chechnya. It does not denounce the UN Peacekeeping Forces for killing hundreds of civilians in Angola, nor the NATO forces who bombed Milosevic’s Belgrade, a city with a million civilians, elderly, babies, women, and children. The morals of war accept as correct in principle, not only politically, what America has done in Afghanistan, including the massive bombing of populated places, including the creation of a refugee stream of hundreds of thousands of people who escaped the horrors of war, for thousands of whom there is no home to return to.

And in our war this is sevenfold more correct, because the enemy soldiers hide out among the population, and it is only through its support that they can fight. Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

While the use of the term "snakes" is abhorrent here, the concept that a war between peoples can only be conducted with the support of those peoples is a valid one. Who is "they" in your quote? The ACTORS who contribute to the war through means other than physical weapons: the imams who incite, the educators who teach, the mothers who raise martyrs, the populace who shelter and celebrate, the government which pays.

This is in NO WAY a call for "vermin control" or genocide. Nor does it reject the status of "civilian". Nor does it claim that people have no right to life. It is the recognition that there is more to war than those who hold the stones in slings or load bullets into guns and that the responsibility lies with ALL the actors. It says (eloquently until the "snakes" part) that the responsibility rests with those who bring war and that the SOLUTION to war is not to stop the guns, its to stop the support.



rylah Is there a connotation to the Hebrew word for "snake" which may be not understood by English speakers?

Sorry for answering late, snakes are snakes.
This is the same politician who pushed for execution of "Jewish terrorists", no wonder Coyote is drawn.
The quote is fro an article by Ori Elyatzor.

What do you mean I am drawn? I am unequivocally opposed to the death penalty (unlike you, I participate outside of IP). I am opposed regardless of whether per one is black or white, Jewish or Muslim.

You justify murder if they feel like it,
but You "oppose" death penalty?

Madhouse stuff.

 

[rylah]

Apparently our "friend" Tinnie thinks honor killings in family, suicide bombing, abuse of women and public execution for apostates and gays is funny business.

Ain't those Pali-supporters nice people.

 

[Coyote]

I am not vague at all. I gave you specific answers on when it is permissible to lie in religions. If you want more you need to be less vague yourself and state what it is you want specifically. I am not up to playing games.

The link I used discussed some of what you are asking.

You were asked specifically about Islam.
Why? Because both of the Palestinian governments established Sharia as main source of legislation.
What does it mean? That Israelis are expected to negotiate with governments who execute gays in public under "civil law", that negotiations and agreements in such a framework are defined as only temporal until Jihad can proceed executing the obligation of forcing Sharia upon both Arabs and Jews.

The problem is the obligation to Jihad, in the strictest legal terms while Jewish law has specific boundaries where it can apply, Islamic law has no boundaries and open agenda of spreading forth.

The question regarding the obligation to oaths in Islamic law, and the obligation of a state to religious definitions of land raise many question regarding the ability of any Palestinian to negotiate any land deals.
In fact there's a question whether any state that is heavily reliant of Islamic law can have a legal framework for an actual agreement on static borders.

The question is can any of the Palestinian governments negotiate in such a framework, or should it be a broader inter-faith legal negotiation regarding Jewish recognition in Islamic world? Maybe the Palestinian governments don't have that kind of authority to start with?

I answered specifically about Islam and Islam is very specific and codified as to how Jihad can be applied, how warfare can be conducted and not conducted, etc.

I would disagree with your claim of forcing Sharia on others. Some of that seems driven by antiIslamic fear mongering around the world.

Muslim Beliefs About Sharia

The question you ask though is a very interesting one and maybe you are right. I do think, without any clear leadership on the Palestinian side it will be up to Israel and the Arab States together to come up with something. Forget the US and Europe.

Coyote You stumble me with that willful ingorance.

Let me put You in some perspective: there're 1.1% Muslims in the US.
There're about 17.2% of Israelis who are Muslims, and 55% of Israeli Jews have parents who lived in Muslim countries as dhimmis under Sharia.

Not some FOX news special, not a reality show...real dhimmis, who had to wear shoes on their shoulder when out of ghetto, those same Jews who were made BY sharia to pay triple taxes.
Those same Jews against whom was made a precedent in Your codified Jihad of how to break oaths and agreements. Those same Jews whom Islam blames for the death of their prophet.

So now go tell me what You know about Islam, You're an AMERICAN, we're ISRAELIS, we don't live somewhere "out there" where Islam/Jihad is a "liberal progressive movement" of a tiny minority of western school graduates, to present this as Islam is an insult to everyone's intelligence, which is offensive taqqiyah in its' purest form. Why is it offensive? Because the same people who pose as mainstream Muslim human rights activists are promoting Sharia and Jihad full knowingly how Sharia really operates when Islam is a majority. YOU know how Sharia operates.

We're living HERE in the mids of 99.9% of the Muslims of the world, in the same neighborhood where Islam originated and spread by sword. This is the real living and kicking Islam in all its' color in modern times. Here Jihad is daily holy war against us Jews, Yazidis, and non Muslims alike. Not some 500 years ago, but today, as we speak.

Not on FOX special, it's daily reality of a non-ending, what You call "codified" holy war.
Millions of Muslims are actually dying because of Islam's so called "codified" Jihad.

You need to change Your equation.
And You obviously didn't read that link, here's what it says:

89% Palestinians want Sharia as Law of the Land.
44% Sharia has to apply to non-Muslims
82% say converting others is a religious duty
66% death penalty for LEAVING ISLAM
84% stoning for punishment of adultery
76% for corporal punishment for theft
40% suicide bombing justified
44-46% family honor killing justifiable
48% polygamy is moral
33% say wife should be allowed to divorce her husband

These are the figures of one of the most extremist societies in the whole middle east.
That walks under the banner of 4 caliphates, who execute their own people in daylight public
and have Holy War against Jews as a public charter.

Now You're trying to tell an Iraqi-Palestinian Jew he is confused about Islam by western anti-Islam fear mongering, and You think this makes any sense?

Stop with the hypocrisy and listen - we Jews, have been suffering from Jihad and Sharia since Islam started, and we were clearly made its' main victims though...we were insignificant.

You need to change the equation, Islam is always a majority, it has no aim to stay as a minority.
Judaism has always been a minority culture, usually dominated by bigger empires, like Islam.
It's in the DNA of Judaism, we were made to exist among with others, there's no theology or commandment of a Jewish majority in the world, like in Christianity or in Islam, and even when we create a majority in a tiny sliver of land we're still a minority culture. When Islam is presented as the minority culture in the US it's not a true representation, when Jews are represented as a minority or as Israelis as a Jewish majority, we're still talking about a minority society less than that of the Muslim percentage in the US.

We had our share of Sharia, Jihad and Islam experience first hand before and after, first row in the show.
Enough to tell the rest of You folks, and that's when 1948 comes to prove a point.

The fact that you are Israeli may color your own bias in how you view Taqiya. Are you suggesting Islam is the same the world over, that Muslims in America want Sharia to be the law of the land? If so...then I suggest that goes into the same basket as the Jewish canards.

Taqqiya is what You're doing for as long as I've pointed to specific aspects of Islamic law,
since then You've been evading, deflecting, presenting strawmen and telling me about some westernized version of Your Muslim hip progressive friends.

I'm saying that Jihad started as a holy war against Jews, never ended.
Your link says Palestinians are one of the top 3 most abusive Islamic societies on earth.
Your link says Palestinians are among the most abusive societies towards women.
Your link says majority of Palestinians see murder as a solution for apostasy and family matters
Your link says that 600,000,000 justify suicide bombing compared to "only" 700,000 American Muslims.


Your link says You're full of it- no other culture has these numbers screaming this story so loudly.
YOU KNOW how Sharia operates in action, You know how Jihad operates, You know that "Palestine" means a holy war against Jews yet You play the PC act -because Your chosen "underdog hero" is one of the most abusive societies on earth.

Go convince someone else that Swastika on the Palestinian flag is merely a "sun symbol", or that Jihad and Sharia are mere invitations to a wine and cheese party where Jews and Christians are not the main meal.

No. Taqiya is what you do with your Islamaphobic hatred of all Muslims and your unwillingness to recognize differences in cultures around the world. You are no different than the antisemites.

 

[Coyote]

No they are not. Entirely my point.

Gee...I wonder why settlers stone Palestinian children on their way to school...target practice for vermin control?

"They are all enemy combatants, and their
shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

Why don't you post the entire quote, for context, rather than attempting to make equivalent things which are not equivalent. It looks an awful lot like projection to me.

Here's the whole quote:

"The Palestinian people has declared war on us, and we must respond with war. Not an operation, not a slow-moving one, not low-intensity, not controlled escalation, no destruction of terror infrastructure, no targeted killings. Enough with the oblique references. This is a war. Words have meanings. This is a war. It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started.

I don’t know why it’s so hard for us to define reality with the simple words that language puts at our disposal. Why do we have to make up a new name for the war every other week, just to avoid calling it by its name. What’s so horrifying about understanding that the entire Palestinian people is the enemy? Every war is between two peoples, and in every war the people who started the war, that whole people, is the enemy. A declaration of war is not a war crime. Responding with war certainly is not. Nor is the use of the word “war”, nor a clear definition who the enemy is. Au contraire: the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.

And the morality of war knows that it is not possible to refrain from hurting enemy civilians. It does not condemn the British air force, which bombed and totally destroyed the German city of Dresden, or the US planes that destroyed the cities of Poland and wrecked half of Budapest, places whose wretched residents had never done a thing to America, but which had to be destroyed in order to win the war against evil. The morals of war do not require that Russia be brought to trial, though it bombs and destroys towns and neighborhoods in Chechnya. It does not denounce the UN Peacekeeping Forces for killing hundreds of civilians in Angola, nor the NATO forces who bombed Milosevic’s Belgrade, a city with a million civilians, elderly, babies, women, and children. The morals of war accept as correct in principle, not only politically, what America has done in Afghanistan, including the massive bombing of populated places, including the creation of a refugee stream of hundreds of thousands of people who escaped the horrors of war, for thousands of whom there is no home to return to.

And in our war this is sevenfold more correct, because the enemy soldiers hide out among the population, and it is only through its support that they can fight. Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

While the use of the term "snakes" is abhorrent here, the concept that a war between peoples can only be conducted with the support of those peoples is a valid one. Who is "they" in your quote? The ACTORS who contribute to the war through means other than physical weapons: the imams who incite, the educators who teach, the mothers who raise martyrs, the populace who shelter and celebrate, the government which pays.

This is in NO WAY a call for "vermin control" or genocide. Nor does it reject the status of "civilian". Nor does it claim that people have no right to life. It is the recognition that there is more to war than those who hold the stones in slings or load bullets into guns and that the responsibility lies with ALL the actors. It says (eloquently until the "snakes" part) that the responsibility rests with those who bring war and that the SOLUTION to war is not to stop the guns, its to stop the support.



rylah Is there a connotation to the Hebrew word for "snake" which may be not understood by English speakers?

Sorry for answering late, snakes are snakes.
This is the same politician who pushed for execution of "Jewish terrorists", no wonder Coyote is drawn.
The quote is fro an article by Ori Elyatzor.

What do you mean I am drawn? I am unequivocally opposed to the death penalty (unlike you, I participate outside of IP). I am opposed regardless of whether per one is black or white, Jewish or Muslim.

You justify murder if they feel like it,
but You "oppose" death penalty?

Madhouse stuff.

Liar.

Show me where I have EVER justified murder. Link. Or admit you are lying.

 

[Coyote]

I doubt they put much thought of Sharia, replacement theology or much of the rest of that as they are throwing stones.

On the contrary, I believe that is exactly why they are throwing stones (and let's not forget the bullets, bombs and knives). That is their mother's milk. None of their arguments make sense without that foundation.

Balony. If they feel that the settlers are stealing their land, a feeling that is justifiable, then it absolutely makes sense. You justifying and perpetrating double standard that is hugely damaging to minors incarcerated in its system and likely helps perpetrate the violence.

If they feel like it, it's justifiable? Really?
And then You feel morally justified to blame Israel for something, right?

No I just enjoy this freak show too much...

When Israel is to blame it is to blame. Unlike you I do not believe Israel (or the Palestinians) can do no wrong.