The topic of Rachel Corrie came up in this thread:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1337036409/50#50

She was an American woman killed while protesting the bulldozing of homes in Palestine. There is disagreement over the exact circumstances, but let's stick with the 'Palestinian' version - she was deliberately run over by a bulldozer while standing in its path as a protest.

I pointed out that this woman is an example to all Palestinians - one that they are unfortunately very unlikely to follow. What followed was one of those intriguing cases where people who disagree with you prove your point. Falah started out by claiming that the only reason she received worldwide media attention was because she was a white American - it was a racist thing. He attempted to prove this by posting examples of Muslims doing the same thing and not getting the same level of media attention. The only problem is, they were not actually doing the same thing. Falah demonstrated that even for well-off Muslims on the other side of the world, it is impossible to distinguish what made Rachel Corrie so special.

So what makes her special? Basically, she defended the rights of others in a way that was not violent and did not threaten violence, but interfered with actions she considered to be wrong.

There are many iconic examples of non-violent civil disobedience that the rest of the world looks to. Examples include Jesus standing down soldiers who would save him, Ghandi making salt, Mandela rescuing South Africa from almost inevitable violence, the tank man of Tiananmen square man staring down the Chinese army, many of the eastern philosophers, right down to hippies chaining themselves to trees. You can see it for yourself when the leaders of obviously impassioned protestors plea for peaceful interactions with authorities. This is not to say that Ghandi and Mandela for example rejected violence outright. They acknowledged that the aggressor or oppressor can lower the bar and force the conflict 'down'. However today the internet and the prevalence of cameras and videos makes even the most hardened dictator nervous about public violence. It is just a shame that there are no photos or videos publicly available that show what actually happened to Corrie.

So why is this concept so alien to Muslims? I would like to suggest two reasons. They both boil down to a misunderstanding in the west of what Muslims actually want.

1) Martyrdom and virgins. I don't think you get your virgins unless you make at least a token effort at aggression. So instead of standing in front of a tank, the Palestinians throw rocks at it. From an Islamic perspective the outcome is better - you die a martyr. These martyrs become local heroes and inspire others to blow themselves up and do whatever they can. To the civilised world it is a PR disaster. Your death is wasted. Instead of a global outcry, people see your video on the internet, throwing rocks at armed soldiers, and think 'what a loser'. There was genuine outcry over Rachel Corrie. People even organised a boycott of Caterpillar (the manufacturer of the bulldozers) until they stopped selling to Israel. But these efforts keep fizzling out because Palestinians destroy them.

2) The Palestinians, and Muslims in general, do not want peace. Islam is a religion of power and oppression. It cannot cope with losing a war. It cannot cope with trying to make peace with the victors. It cannot cope with a Jewish homeland in land 'owned' by Islam. When Muslims say peace, they mean the peace that comes with military victory. What Muslims want is victory or death. What Islam permits for Muslims in victory would make the Israelis look like Ghandi. Fortunately they have been denied victory for a very long time (even when they greatly outnumbered Israel). So that only leaves them with the option of death. Would-be terrorists arrested in the UK are often the children of Muslim immigrants who left the middle east to escape the endless cycles of violence. Unfortunately many of their children are raised as good Muslims and feel compelled to import the endless violence from their ancestral homeland.

Muslims actually want the bloodshed to continue, because once it ends, it means they lost. If they keep the death toll rising, it is still not over, like Rocky on the ground, but not yet out for the count. You only have to see Abu and Falah talking about the great victory to come (not the peace) to get a feel for what they want.

If Australia was invaded by China you would prefer to lie down in front of Chinese tanks than take up arms? You are both a liar and a coward Freeliar




freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

1) Martyrdom and virgins. I don't think you get your virgins unless you make at least a token effort at aggression. So instead of standing in front of a tank, the Palestinians throw rocks at it. From an Islamic perspective the outcome is better - you die a martyr. These martyrs become local heroes and inspire others to blow themselves up and do whatever they can. To the civilised world it is a PR disaster. Your death is wasted. Instead of a global outcry, people see your video on the internet, throwing rocks at armed soldiers, and think 'what a loser'. There was genuine outcry over Rachel Corrie. People even organised a boycott of Caterpillar (the manufacturer of the bulldozers) until they stopped selling to Israel. But these efforts keep fizzling out because Palestinians destroy them.

Freeliar when will your lies end? Every Believing Muslim man who goes to Heaven will be married to beautiful wives.

Arabic doesn't even have a word for "martyr" although the word "shaeed" (witness) is often translated as "martyr".

Whoever dies doing God's work is considered a shaheed. There are also other types of shaeeds:


Quote:

It was narrated from Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of God (peace & blessings of God upon him) said: “There are five (types) of shaheed: the one who dies of the plague; the one who dies of stomach illness (al-mabtoon); the one who drowns; the one who is crushed by a falling wall; and the one who dies for the sake of God.” [Bukhari & Muslim] In another hadeth the categories of “…the one who dies of pleurisy, and the woman who dies together (with her baby).” [al-Tirmidhi (1846), Abu Dawood (311) and Ibn Maajah (2803)]

Quote:

It was reported in the hadeeth of al-Miqdaam ibn Ma’di Karb that the Prophet (peace & blessings of God upon him) said: “The shaheed has seven blessings from God: he is forgiven from the moment his blood is first shed; he will be shown his place in Paradise (before the Day of Judgement); he will be spared from the torment of the grave; and he will be secure on the Day of the Greatest Terror (the Day of Judgement); there will be placed on his head a crown of dignity, one ruby of which is better than this world and all that is in it; he will be married to seventy-two of beuatiful-eyed maidens; and he will be permitted to intercede for seventy of his relatives.” [Tirmidhi]

freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

The Palestinians, and Muslims in general, do not want peace.

But it is the Israelis who have rejected 7 peace plans in the last 40 years.


freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

Islam is a religion of power and oppression

C'mon Freeliar, we have seen who the oppressors are. The Spanish inquisition, The Conquest of the Americas and the slaughter of American Indians, periodic pogroms against jews in Europe culminating in the holocaust, while islamic governments have always given refuge to Jews.


The greatest oppressors in the last 2000 years have been Christians, usually the catholic church. We could also mention the persecution of intellectuals by the 'flat Earth' church.


freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

It cannot cope with losing a war.

Freeliar. What is it with you and the lies? Muslims have won and lost many wars. When Muslims turn away from Islam, they have become weak and lost. God Almighty then generates new groups of Muslims to hold the banner of monotheism high.


freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

It cannot cope with trying to make peace with the victors.

You mean surrender. Muslims don't surrender. Do you consider surrender a praiseworthy act? Why don't you go and live in France you surrender-monkey?




freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

It cannot cope with a Jewish homeland in land 'owned' by Islam.

Jews lived in Muslim land with peace and security for centuries while they were persecuted by the Catholic church.

Do Muslims accept that jews steal land and dispossess Muslim? Of course not. Who would accept that?




freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

When Muslims say peace, they mean the peace that comes with military victory.

Oh really? Historically, Muslims have made hundreds of peace treaties. Lookat the history of the Catholic Crusades.
One of the things that first interested me in Islam was seeing the honour of the Muslims during the Crusades. Saladin would always honour peace treaties. The shifty Christians would always break the treaties.



freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

What Muslims want is victory..

Because nobody else wants victory?



freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

or death.

More lies Freeliar? You sure are full of them.



Quote:

The Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him) said: “The best of people is the one who lives long and does good.” [Narrated by Ahmad and al-Tirmidhi, 110; classed as "authentic" by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi]

and he said


Quote:

Glad tidings to the one who lives long and does good. [Narrated by al-Tabaraani and Abu Na’eem, classed as "authentic" by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 3928]

Quote:

Abu Hurayrah said: "Two men became Muslim with the Prophet. One of them became a shaheed, and the other remained (alive) for another year. Talhah ibn ‘Ubaydullaah said: I was shown Paradise (in a dream), and in it I saw that the one who was delayed was admitted before the martyr. I was surprised by that, so the next morning I told the Messenger of God (peace and blessings of God be upon him) about that. The Messenger of God said: “Did he not fast (the month of) Ramadaan after he (the shaheed) was gone, and pray six thousand rak’ahs, or such and such a number of units of prayers for one year?”" [Ahmad; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in al-Silsilah al-Saheehah, 2591. al-‘Ajlooni said in Kashf al-Khafa’: its chain of narrators is "good" ]

Quote:

A man said: “O Messenger of God, which of the people is best?” He said: “The one who lives long and does good.” He said: “Which of the people is worst?” He said: “The one who lives long and does evil.” [Ahmad and al-Tirmidhi, 2330; classed as "authentic" by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi]

Quote:

It was narrated from Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of God said: “No one of you should wish for death or pray for it before it comes, for when one of you dies, his good deeds come to an end and for the believer a long life will not increase him in anything but good.” [Muslim, 2682]

Quote:

“Do not wish to meet the enemy, but ask God to keep you safe and sound.” [Bukari & Muslim]

freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

What Islam permits for Muslims in victory would make the Israelis look like Ghandi.

More lies Freeliar? Jews lived peacefully under Islamic states for centuries.




freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

Would-be terrorists arrested in the UK are often the children of Muslim immigrants who left the middle east to escape the endless cycles of violence. Unfortunately many of their children are raised as good Muslims and feel compelled to import the endless violence from their ancestral homeland

More lies Freeliar? There have been a small number of Muslims arrested which is small in comparison to the number of Catholic Christian terrorist arrested. The Muslims who were arrested mostly come from sub-continental (not Middle Eastern) families that are not often very religious. They were motivated by the oppression of Muslims in the Christian invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, not by religious doctrine.

Did the Uk have such arrests before the UK decided to kill Muslims in Afghanistan?


freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 12:21pm:

Muslims actually want the bloodshed to continue

People can see through your lies Freeliar.

Quote:

God Almighty then generates new groups of Muslims to hold the banner of monotheism high

You mean, win back what was previously lost, by military conquest?


Quote:

You mean surrender. Muslims don't surrender.

Exactly. Thanks for proving my point Falah. Everyone else surrenders when they lose. Why are Muslims so keen to die?


Quote:

Do you consider surrender a praiseworthy act?

It is better than refusing to acknowledge you lost a war. Going to the toilet is not a praiseworthy act, but it sure beats crapping on the floor.


Quote:

More lies Freeliar? Jews lived peacefully under Islamic states for centuries.

See, the Jews can do it, even as second class citizens. But Muslims would rather die, apparently.


Quote:

People can see through your lies Freeliar.

Falah, what is the difference between refusing to surrender when you have lost so miserably, and not wanting the bloodshed to continue? Do you actually think the Palestinians are on the verge of some kind of victory?

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/rachel-corrie-flag-02.jpg

http://www.reocities.com/rachav/rachel-corrie-pal-funeral.jpg

FD, have you read her letters home?

No. I read the first bit of her wikipedia page.

Is there anything of particular interest in them?

Yes. They are mainly emails to her mother and tey offer a lot of insight. If you don't think the website is reliable, there are many others that carry the letters. The Guardian published them, I believe.

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/cur_sit/rachelsletters.html

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 6:39pm:

Yes. They are mainly emails to her mother and tey offer a lot of insight. If you don't think the website is reliable, there are many others that carry the letters. The Guardian published them, I believe. http://www.ifamericansknew.org/cur_sit/rachelsletters.html

Yeah. Bastards. Apparently avram is one of them. Thing is he prolly doesnt know any different. Well he should now. Wonder if he will read the letters?

SOB

Any particular insights?

Why don't you read them and see?

I don't read everything people recommend to me, especially if they can't suggest why I should read it. One man's insight is another man's bleeding obvious.

Then don't.

You don't mind using Rachel's death as an "example to all Palestinians" but make no attempt to understand her motivation for being there.

It was her methods that interested me.

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 7:55pm:

Then don't. You don't mind using Rachel's death as an "example to all Palestinians" but make no attempt to understand her motivation for being there.

Annie she should not be there. You know that,

freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 8:54pm:

It was her methods that interested me.

She was part of ISM. They have very clear guidelines for international activists. Her friend's house was to be demolished and she tried to stop the bulldozer that ran over her twice by shouting at the driver with a megaphone, I believe and standing on a pile of of dirt so she could be seen in her high vis clothing.
There were plenty of witnesses. Her boyfriend was standing not far away.



Quote:

So what makes her special? Basically, she defended the rights of others in a way that was not violent and did not threaten violence, but interfered with actions she considered to be wrong.

You are wrong about that. Rachel understood the motivation for Palestinian violence and explained her reasoning to her mother in the letters that you're too lazy to read.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 9:32pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 7:55pm: Then don't. You don't mind using Rachel's death as an "example to all Palestinians" but make no attempt to understand her motivation for being there. Annie she should not be there. You know that,

She should have been there. More people should be there. I would be there if I could.

fd is scared to read them, lest he stumble across facts that cause him to have take the side of Muslims* against the Zionists.

*Leaving aside the fact of Palestinian Christians for now, who most Western Christians abandon due to them being Arabs and therefore "One with the Saracens", just like in the days of the Crusades, when they were slaughtered en masse along with their fellow Muslim countrymen.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 9:32pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 7:55pm: Then don't. You don't mind using Rachel's death as an "example to all Palestinians" but make no attempt to understand her motivation for being there. Annie she should not be there. You know that,

Did the israeli who ran her over cold bloodedly get charged with murder? Why not? Was it you?

SOB

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 11:25pm:

freediver wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 8:54pm: It was her methods that interested me. She was part of ISM. They have very clear guidelines for international activists. Her friend's house was to be demolished and she tried to stop the bulldozer that ran over her twice by shouting at the driver with a megaphone, I believe and standing on a pile of of dirt so she could be seen in her high vis clothing. There were plenty of witnesses. Her boyfriend was standing not far away. Quote: So what makes her special? Basically, she defended the rights of others in a way that was not violent and did not threaten violence, but interfered with actions she considered to be wrong. You are wrong about that. Rachel understood the motivation for Palestinian violence and explained her reasoning to her mother in the letters that you're too lazy to read.

I understand their motivation as well. That is not the same thing as condoning violence.

If there were so many witnesses, why did none bother to photograph it while it was actually happening? There would be something kind of spectacular (if a little slow) about a face-off between a protestor and a bulldozer. I would have been snapping away.

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 11:27pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 9:32pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 7:55pm: Then don't. You don't mind using Rachel's death as an "example to all Palestinians" but make no attempt to understand her motivation for being there. Annie she should not be there. You know that, She should have been there. More people should be there. I would be there if I could.

No she should not it is not herr business

Quote:

I would have been snapping away.

How many palestinians do you think can afford cameras?

SOB

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 8:33am:

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 11:27pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 9:32pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 7:55pm: Then don't. You don't mind using Rachel's death as an "example to all Palestinians" but make no attempt to understand her motivation for being there. Annie she should not be there. You know that, She should have been there. More people should be there. I would be there if I could. No she should not it is not herr business

Yes. It was her business. Its everyone's business. Israel needs to be stopped. Humans are being abused (and murdered) by israelis.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 8:48am:

Quote: I would have been snapping away. How many palestinians do you think can afford cameras? SOB

Compared to their Nike shoes, Adidas clothes and watches they wear?
Strange they always seem to photograph me and my comrades many times in Hebron.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 8:55am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 8:48am: Quote: I would have been snapping away. How many palestinians do you think can afford cameras? SOB Compared to their Nike shoes, Adidas clothes and watches they wear? Strange they always seem to photograph me and my comrades many times in Hebron.

Where do they get them and why arent you answering the other posts?

SOB

freediver wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 8:08am:

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 11:25pm: freediver wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 8:54pm: It was her methods that interested me. She was part of ISM. They have very clear guidelines for international activists. Her friend's house was to be demolished and she tried to stop the bulldozer that ran over her twice by shouting at the driver with a megaphone, I believe and standing on a pile of of dirt so she could be seen in her high vis clothing. There were plenty of witnesses. Her boyfriend was standing not far away. Quote: So what makes her special? Basically, she defended the rights of others in a way that was not violent and did not threaten violence, but interfered with actions she considered to be wrong. You are wrong about that. Rachel understood the motivation for Palestinian violence and explained her reasoning to her mother in the letters that you're too lazy to read. I understand their motivation as well. That is not the same thing as condoning violence. If there were so many witnesses, why did none bother to photograph it while it was actually happening? There would be something kind of spectacular (if a little slow) about a face-off between a protestor and a bulldozer. I would have been snapping away.

Would you? You'd snap away while your friend was being murdered in front of you?

The protesters faced off with the bulldozers on a daily basis. It wasn't a one off incident.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 8:33am:

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 11:27pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 9:32pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 7:55pm: Then don't. You don't mind using Rachel's death as an "example to all Palestinians" but make no attempt to understand her motivation for being there. Annie she should not be there. You know that, She should have been there. More people should be there. I would be there if I could. No she should not it is not herr business

You know who shouldn't be there? You and the rest of your Israeli friends.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 8:48am:

Quote: I would have been snapping away. How many palestinians do you think can afford cameras? SOB

There are photos that appear to have been taken a few minutes before and a few minutes after. Perhaps the photographer wanted to save money on film processing.


Quote:

Would you? You'd snap away while your friend was being murdered in front of you?

I would not realise she was being murdered until the bulldozer hit her. I would be expecting a close call, and would see it as an excellent photo opportunity. If I wanted the death to mean anything, I would make sure I got the proof that Israelis did it. I doubt anyone taking photos in that context would fail to consider the situations they might find themselves in.


Quote:

The protesters faced off with the bulldozers on a daily basis. It wasn't a one off incident.

I see. Perhaps it was an accident after all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLlUgilKqms

... wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:26pm:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLlUgilKqms

So its ok for me to joke about the holocaust?

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:29pm:

... wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:26pm: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLlUgilKqms So its ok for me to joke about the holocaust?

What are you asking me for? 

freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 6:21pm:

Quote: You mean surrender. Muslims don't surrender. Exactly. Thanks for proving my point Falah. Everyone else surrenders when they lose. Why are Muslims so keen to die?

Do they? Did the Australian Army  surrender to the Japanese when the japanese were conquering Papua new Guinea?

You are full of lies Freeliar. You present only a distorted view of reality.




freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 6:21pm:

Quote: Do you consider surrender a praiseworthy act? It is better than refusing to acknowledge you lost a war.

If you don't surrender, you haven't lost.


freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 6:21pm:

Going to the toilet is not a praiseworthy act...

Really? I would hate to be your parent. Have you tried toilet-training a kid? Do you have a lot of fines for public urination and the such?


freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 6:21pm:

Quote: More lies Freeliar? Jews lived peacefully under Islamic states for centuries. See, the Jews can do it, even as second class citizens. But Muslims would rather die, apparently.

Freeliar it typical of your dishonesty to pretend that these jews surrendered to Muslims. They were minorities in the lands under muslim rule, therefore it was the Christians who surrendered. The to this would be Yemen where most of the Jews converted to Islam after their rabbis lost a debating tournament with the 4th Roshidoon Calpih Ali in the 7th century CE.


Quote:

People can see through your lies Freeliar.

Falah, what is the difference between refusing to surrender when you have lost so miserably, and not wanting the bloodshed to continue? Do you actually think the Palestinians are on the verge of some kind of victory?[/quote]

It is one thing to sign a peace treaty, another thing to surrender. We have seen what happens to those who made the mistake of surrender eg. Catholics genocided Muslims and Jews in Spain.

Take the Aboriginal example in Australia. The Aborigines who surrenderd to the British Christians were virtually wiped out and dispossessed. Those who put up the fiercest resistance, like the Yolngu Arnhem Landers, today remain on their land.

History shows us that many wars have looked lost before they swung the other way. The USSR looked lost in 1941 when the Nazis were on the outskirts of Moscow. Just over three years later Soviet troops had captured Berlin.

It looked like the merciless Crusaders were firmly entrenched in the Palestine when Saladin became leader of Egypt in 1167. 20 years later Saladin had managed to unify the muslims in the region and expel the Christian invaders from Jerusalem. The Crusader occuaption of jerusalem last for 99 years. The Balfour Zionist occupation of Jerusalem has lasted 94 years.

In recent years Muslim have freed Sinai, Gaza and southern Lebanon from the Zionist occupation.

Since 2000 muslims have managed to force Israel to withdraw from Gaza and southern Lebanon. Full victory is just around the corner by the Grace of God Almighty.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKr0UJbFjCY

freediver wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:18pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 8:48am: Quote: I would have been snapping away. How many palestinians do you think can afford cameras? SOB There are photos that appear to have been taken a few minutes before and a few minutes after. Perhaps the photographer wanted to save money on film processing. [quote]Would you? You'd snap away while your friend was being murdered in front of you?

I would not realise she was being murdered until the bulldozer hit her. I would be expecting a close call, and would see it as an excellent photo opportunity. If I wanted the death to mean anything, I would make sure I got the proof that Israelis did it. I doubt anyone taking photos in that context would fail to consider the situations they might find themselves in.


Quote:

The protesters faced off with the bulldozers on a daily basis. It wasn't a one off incident.

I see. Perhaps it was an accident after all.[/quote]


Do you believe it was an accident?

Question: Why don't Jewish cannibals like eating Germans?
Answer: They give them gas.

Q: Why did the Auschwitz shower heads have 12 holes?
A: Because Jews have 10 fingers!!

Q: What's the difference between a ton of coal and a thousand Jews?
A: Jews burn longer.

Q: What is the difference between a Jew and a pizza?
A: The pizza doesn't scream when you throw it in the oven.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:42pm:

Question: Why don't Jewish cannibals like eating Germans? Answer: They give them gas. Q: Why did the Auschwitz shower heads have 12 holes? A: Because Jews have 10 fingers!! Q: What's the difference between a ton of coal and a thousand Jews? A: Jews burn longer. Q: What is the difference between a Jew and a pizza? A: The pizza doesn't scream when you throw it in the oven.

Those are hilarious

SOB

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:42pm:

Question: Why don't Jewish cannibals like eating Germans? Answer: They give them gas. Q: Why did the Auschwitz shower heads have 12 holes? A: Because Jews have 10 fingers!! Q: What's the difference between a ton of coal and a thousand Jews? A: Jews burn longer. Q: What is the difference between a Jew and a pizza? A: The pizza doesn't scream when you throw it in the oven.

You are an animal. I hope you get banned again - permanently.

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:48pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:42pm: Question: Why don't Jewish cannibals like eating Germans? Answer: They give them gas. Q: Why did the Auschwitz shower heads have 12 holes? A: Because Jews have 10 fingers!! Q: What's the difference between a ton of coal and a thousand Jews? A: Jews burn longer. Q: What is the difference between a Jew and a pizza? A: The pizza doesn't scream when you throw it in the oven. You are an animal. I hope you get banned again - permanently.

:(
But its ok for tolerator to do it

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:39pm:

freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:18pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 8:48am: Quote: I would have been snapping away. How many palestinians do you think can afford cameras? SOB There are photos that appear to have been taken a few minutes before and a few minutes after. Perhaps the photographer wanted to save money on film processing. [quote]Would you? You'd snap away while your friend was being murdered in front of you? I would not realise she was being murdered until the bulldozer hit her. I would be expecting a close call, and would see it as an excellent photo opportunity. If I wanted the death to mean anything, I would make sure I got the proof that Israelis did it. I doubt anyone taking photos in that context would fail to consider the situations they might find themselves in. [quote]The protesters faced off with the bulldozers on a daily basis. It wasn't a one off incident.

I see. Perhaps it was an accident after all.[/quote]


Do you believe it was an accident?[/quote]

It wasnt an accident. In Australia (and most other countries) you arent allowed to murder ppl. If they chain themselves to a tree you have to have the authorities remove them before bulldozing the tree. Israelis dont have any compassion though.

SOB

There are jokes about anything. Any time there is an accident or something theres the page of jokes. Remember the diana jokes? Comon you couldn't help yourself but laugh @ 1 of them prolly. Thing is how are any of these jokes any different just because they are about the holocaust?

That first one was pretty good though. you have to admit.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:52pm:

There are jokes about anything. Any time there is an accident or something theres the page of jokes. Remember the diana jokes? Comon you couldn't help yourself but laugh @ 1 of them prolly. Thing is how are any of these jokes any different just because they are about the holocaust? That first one was pretty good though. you have to admit. SOB

It should be illegal not to joke about Diana's death

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:49pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:48pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:42pm: Question: Why don't Jewish cannibals like eating Germans? Answer: They give them gas. Q: Why did the Auschwitz shower heads have 12 holes? A: Because Jews have 10 fingers!! Q: What's the difference between a ton of coal and a thousand Jews? A: Jews burn longer. Q: What is the difference between a Jew and a pizza? A: The pizza doesn't scream when you throw it in the oven. You are an animal. I hope you get banned again - permanently. :( But its ok for tolerator to do it

I didn't watch the video. If it was anything as remotely disgusting as your 'jokes' I hope he gets the boot too.

Do you even think about what what it is that you're joking about? The horrific murder of children on a massive scale - f.cking hilarious, isn't it?

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:55pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:49pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:48pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:42pm: Question: Why don't Jewish cannibals like eating Germans? Answer: They give them gas. Q: Why did the Auschwitz shower heads have 12 holes? A: Because Jews have 10 fingers!! Q: What's the difference between a ton of coal and a thousand Jews? A: Jews burn longer. Q: What is the difference between a Jew and a pizza? A: The pizza doesn't scream when you throw it in the oven. You are an animal. I hope you get banned again - permanently. :( But its ok for tolerator to do it I didn't watch the video. If it was anything as remotely disgusting as your 'jokes' I hope he gets the boot too. Do you even think about what what it is that you're joking about? The horrific murder of children on a massive scale - f.cking hilarious, isn't it?

I am the only person here who takes the holocaust seriously because I actually would like to know the truth. If you cared you would want that too.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:50pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:39pm: freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:18pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 8:48am: Quote: I would have been snapping away. How many palestinians do you think can afford cameras? SOB There are photos that appear to have been taken a few minutes before and a few minutes after. Perhaps the photographer wanted to save money on film processing. [quote]Would you? You'd snap away while your friend was being murdered in front of you? I would not realise she was being murdered until the bulldozer hit her. I would be expecting a close call, and would see it as an excellent photo opportunity. If I wanted the death to mean anything, I would make sure I got the proof that Israelis did it. I doubt anyone taking photos in that context would fail to consider the situations they might find themselves in. [quote]The protesters faced off with the bulldozers on a daily basis. It wasn't a one off incident. I see. Perhaps it was an accident after all.

Do you believe it was an accident?[/quote]

It wasnt an accident. In Australia (and most other countries) you arent allowed to murder ppl. If they chain themselves to a tree you have to have the authorities remove them before bulldozing the tree. Israelis dont have any compassion though.
SOB[/quote]


You show your ignorance.

There are many Israelis working for peace and Palestinian rights.

Quote:

Do you even think about what what it is that you're joking about? The horrific murder of children on a massive scale - f.cking hilarious, isn't it?

Nice lil dog whistle there to make it look more horrible.

Think of the children!

SOB

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:57pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:50pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:39pm: freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:18pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 8:48am: Quote: I would have been snapping away. How many palestinians do you think can afford cameras? SOB There are photos that appear to have been taken a few minutes before and a few minutes after. Perhaps the photographer wanted to save money on film processing. [quote]Would you? You'd snap away while your friend was being murdered in front of you? I would not realise she was being murdered until the bulldozer hit her. I would be expecting a close call, and would see it as an excellent photo opportunity. If I wanted the death to mean anything, I would make sure I got the proof that Israelis did it. I doubt anyone taking photos in that context would fail to consider the situations they might find themselves in. [quote]The protesters faced off with the bulldozers on a daily basis. It wasn't a one off incident. I see. Perhaps it was an accident after all. Do you believe it was an accident?

It wasnt an accident. In Australia (and most other countries) you arent allowed to murder ppl. If they chain themselves to a tree you have to have the authorities remove them before bulldozing the tree. Israelis dont have any compassion though.
SOB[/quote]


You show your ignorance.

There are many Israelis working for peace and Palestinian rights.[/quote]

You know good and well I meant the ones making the laws (you know that allow them to get a court order to bulldoze ppls houses).

you are just mad cause im agreeing with PP.

SOB

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:49pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:48pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:42pm: Question: Why don't Jewish cannibals like eating Germans? Answer: They give them gas. Q: Why did the Auschwitz shower heads have 12 holes? A: Because Jews have 10 fingers!! Q: What's the difference between a ton of coal and a thousand Jews? A: Jews burn longer. Q: What is the difference between a Jew and a pizza? A: The pizza doesn't scream when you throw it in the oven. You are an animal. I hope you get banned again - permanently. :( But its ok for tolerator to do it

You don't see a difference between one person being run over by an extremely slow-moving vehicle and the systematic exermination of millions of people?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:59pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:57pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:50pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:39pm: freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:18pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 8:48am: Quote: I would have been snapping away. How many palestinians do you think can afford cameras? SOB There are photos that appear to have been taken a few minutes before and a few minutes after. Perhaps the photographer wanted to save money on film processing. [quote]Would you? You'd snap away while your friend was being murdered in front of you? I would not realise she was being murdered until the bulldozer hit her. I would be expecting a close call, and would see it as an excellent photo opportunity. If I wanted the death to mean anything, I would make sure I got the proof that Israelis did it. I doubt anyone taking photos in that context would fail to consider the situations they might find themselves in. [quote]The protesters faced off with the bulldozers on a daily basis. It wasn't a one off incident. I see. Perhaps it was an accident after all. Do you believe it was an accident? It wasnt an accident. In Australia (and most other countries) you arent allowed to murder ppl. If they chain themselves to a tree you have to have the authorities remove them before bulldozing the tree. Israelis dont have any compassion though. SOB

You show your ignorance.

There are many Israelis working for peace and Palestinian rights.[/quote]

You know good and well I meant the ones making the laws (you know that allow them to get a court order to bulldoze ppls houses).

you are just mad cause im agreeing with PP.

SOB[/quote]


Mad? Don't flatter yourself. I couldn't care less who you agree with.

Why dont you concentrate on one issue and actually make an attempt to understand it instead of spouting crap about everything you can possibly think of?

... wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:03pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:49pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:48pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 12:42pm: Question: Why don't Jewish cannibals like eating Germans? Answer: They give them gas. Q: Why did the Auschwitz shower heads have 12 holes? A: Because Jews have 10 fingers!! Q: What's the difference between a ton of coal and a thousand Jews? A: Jews burn longer. Q: What is the difference between a Jew and a pizza? A: The pizza doesn't scream when you throw it in the oven. You are an animal. I hope you get banned again - permanently. :( But its ok for tolerator to do it You don't see a difference between one person being run over by an extremely slow-moving vehicle and the systematic exermination of millions of people?

You are just as bad as PP.

Here we go with the emotional correctness thang again....

Ban PP. He is anti-Semitic scum.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:11pm:

Ban PP. He is anti-Semitic scum.

Ban avram he is semitic scum

SOB

... wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:09pm:

Here we go with the emotional correctness thang again....

As opposed to what? Emotional incorrectness?

If you don't like it, don't read my posts. Pretty damn simple.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:11pm:

Ban PP. He is anti-Semitic scum.

gas me

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:15pm:

... wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:09pm: Here we go with the emotional correctness thang again.... As opposed to what? Emotional incorrectness? If you don't like it, don't read my posts. Pretty damn simple.

How about I don't read your posts, and then make pronouncements about you anyway?  It's only fair seeing as how you didn't even watch the clip, yet still saw fit to make a song and dance about it.

How about you get a clue?

My comment about you being as bad as that other idiot was about this:


Quote:

You don't see a difference between one person being run over by an extremely slow-moving vehicle and the systematic exermination of millions of people?

This is what I said about the video:


Quote:

I didn't watch the video. If it was anything as remotely disgusting as your 'jokes' I hope he gets the boot too.

You know what 'if' means, right?

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:17pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:11pm: Ban PP. He is anti-Semitic scum. gas me

Don't come to Israel ever. Those comments you make.
We will make you eat every word if you repeat them.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:40pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:17pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:11pm: Ban PP. He is anti-Semitic scum. gas me Don't come to Israel ever. Those comments you make. We will make you eat every word if you repeat them.

Why would I want to go to scumrael?
Much easier to silence the truth then to respond to it legitimately right

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:44pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:40pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:17pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:11pm: Ban PP. He is anti-Semitic scum. gas me Don't come to Israel ever. Those comments you make. We will make you eat every word if you repeat them. Why would I want to go to scumrael? Much easier to silence the truth then to respond to it legitimately right

My friend you are frightened to death of us.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:48pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:44pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:40pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:17pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:11pm: Ban PP. He is anti-Semitic scum. gas me Don't come to Israel ever. Those comments you make. We will make you eat every word if you repeat them. Why would I want to go to scumrael? Much easier to silence the truth then to respond to it legitimately right My friend you are frightened to death of us.

Irrational religious nutjobs are quite a confronting thing but I would have no issue putting you on your ass

I have served 3 years in the IDF.
I have been shot at, had people threat to cut my throat had everyday faced death.

You have no idea at all.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:56pm:

I have served 3 years in the IDF. I have been shot at, had people threat to cut my throat had everyday faced death. You have no idea at all.

Fairly sure anyone could do that with a semi auto in their hands

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:54pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:48pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:44pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:40pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:17pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:11pm: Ban PP. He is anti-Semitic scum. gas me Don't come to Israel ever. Those comments you make. We will make you eat every word if you repeat them. Why would I want to go to scumrael? Much easier to silence the truth then to respond to it legitimately right My friend you are frightened to death of us. Irrational religious nutjobs are quite a confronting thing but I would have no issue putting you on your ass

That might carry some weight when you're postpubescent.

I know you would have wet pants if you spend just one day with us on the west bank.
In cast lead we go down closed off small streets where buildings too dense for air support.
We ate dropped by helicopter in middle of deserted block. You think a semi-auto make it all easy.

You live in this country where you have no war, no fear.
But do not tell me how easy it is in the army because you do not know anything.

Aussie people who may know is Vietnam vets.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 2:01pm:

I know you would have wet pants if you spend just one day with us on the west bank. In cast lead we go down closed off small streets where buildings too dense for air support. We ate dropped by helicopter in middle of deserted block. You think a semi-auto make it all easy. You live in this country where you have no war, no fear. But do not tell me how easy it is in the army because you do not know anything. Aussie people who may know is Vietnam vets.

You wouldn't be alive to see it cause Id friendly fire

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:58pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:54pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:48pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:44pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:40pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:17pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:11pm: Ban PP. He is anti-Semitic scum. gas me Don't come to Israel ever. Those comments you make. We will make you eat every word if you repeat them. Why would I want to go to scumrael? Much easier to silence the truth then to respond to it legitimately right My friend you are frightened to death of us. Irrational religious nutjobs are quite a confronting thing but I would have no issue putting you on your ass That might carry some weight when you're postpubescent.

Yes cause the real baby is not the one who attacks unarmed civilians with a semi auto rifle in your hands

Nope. I just thought better of you.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 2:01pm:

I know you would have wet pants if you spend just one day with us on the west bank. In cast lead we go down closed off small streets where buildings too dense for air support. We ate dropped by helicopter in middle of deserted block. You think a semi-auto make it all easy. You live in this country where you have no war, no fear. But do not tell me how easy it is in the army because you do not know anything. Aussie people who may know is Vietnam vets.

I know what war is like. But this isnt about war. Its about israel oppressing palestinians and killing them willy nilly. Bullying with the support of the yanks. Bulldozing their homes and crops. Destroying their wells. etc etc etc. If it was a war then it would be more equal.

SOB

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 2:01pm:

You live in this country where you have no war, no fear. But do not tell me how easy it is in the army because you do not know anything. Aussie people who may know is Vietnam vets.

You got it in one, old son.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtpTxjeE9SQ

The only reason the Israelis can get away with depicting it as a war is because the Palestinians insist on making it a war. Falah even backed me up on this and argued in favour of not surrendering. The Palestinians and many other countries launched a full scale military invasion of Israel decades ago. They lost, but as Falah suggested they did not surrender. If someone attacks you, loses, but refuses to surrender and keeps firing rockets, blowing up busses etc, then they leave you with no choice but to respond with your military.

Annie:


Quote:

Do you believe it was an accident?

I don't really care. What matters is that the Palestinian sympathisers believe she died that way, but the Muslims among them are incapable of even seeing how it is different.

I do think it is a shame there is no evidence. It makes it easier for people like Falah to put the outcry in the west down to racism.


Falah:


falah wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:32pm:

freediver wrote on May 22nd, 2012 at 6:21pm: Quote: You mean surrender. Muslims don't surrender. Exactly. Thanks for proving my point Falah. Everyone else surrenders when they lose. Why are Muslims so keen to die? Do they? Did the Australian Army  surrender to the Japanese when the japanese were conquering Papua new Guinea? You are full of lies Freeliar. You present only a distorted view of reality.

Earth to Falah - we won that war. Is that really how you see the Palestinian conflict?


Quote:

If you don't surrender, you haven't lost.

No Falah. You have still lost. Surrendering is up to you, but you cannot deny the reality of the situation.


Quote:

Have you tried toilet-training a kid?

Good point Falah. Perhaps that is how I should approach you.


Quote:

It is one thing to sign a peace treaty, another thing to surrender.

Thanks for being so honest Falah. The Israelis are merely acknowledging your honesty in refusing to sign the peace treaties, as it would be pretty pointless to sign one with people who see no contradiction between a peace treaty and believing you are still at war and going to win.


Quote:

Take the Aboriginal example in Australia. The Aborigines who surrenderd to the British Christians were virtually wiped out and dispossessed. Those who put up the fiercest resistance, like the Yolngu Arnhem Landers, today remain on their land.

Abu you are having serious problems with reality. The only reason those aborigines could do that is because the vast majority of settlers went south where European farming methods would work. Even today there are very few white people in the far north. Darwin's population is only 130 thousand. Where settlers and aborigines interacted significantly, any tribes that were violent towards the settlers were slaughtered. The Palestinians have it easy by comparison. If the old standards applied they would be slaughtered. If Muslim standards applied they would be slaughtered.


Quote:

History shows us that many wars have looked lost before they swung the other way. The USSR looked lost in 1941 when the Nazis were on the outskirts of Moscow. Just over three years later Soviet troops had captured Berlin

Is this how you see the Palestinian conflict?


Quote:

Since 2000 muslims have managed to force Israel to withdraw from Gaza and southern Lebanon. Full victory is just around the corner by the Grace of God Almighty.

You are seriously deluded. No wonder the rest of the world has no interest in helping the Palestinians. The only thing 'forcing' the Israelis is internal politics. The only thing keeping alive the Palestinians who think they will defeat Israel is the generosity of the Israelis.

Where exactly should the palestinians go?

SOB

They don't need to go anywhere. Though if I was there on either side I would try to get anywhere else.

They just have to stop firing rockets and deluding themselves that they are about to have a great military victory over Israel. They have to want peace more than victory or death (though it is obviously their choice). They are literally throwing rocks at tanks and imagining themselves warriors.

freediver wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 6:54pm:

They don't need to go anywhere. Though if I was there on either side I would try to get anywhere else. They just have to stop firing rockets and deluding themselves that they are about to have a great military victory over Israel. They have to want peace more than victory or death (though it is obviously their choice). They are literally throwing rocks at tanks and imagining themselves warriors.

Everytime they stop (when there are ceasefires) israel starts bulldozing again.

SOB

freediver wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 6:54pm:

They don't need to go anywhere. Though if I was there on either side I would try to get anywhere else. They just have to stop firing rockets and deluding themselves that they are about to have a great military victory over Israel. They have to want peace more than victory or death (though it is obviously their choice). They are literally throwing rocks at tanks and imagining themselves warriors.

So in your view the Jews should have accepted defeat by the Nazis and not defended themselves?
They are braver warriors then any soldier from any army in the world, its one thing to go to battle with billions of dollars of firepower.. Try doing it like they do.
A lot braver then the jews in the holocaust, which makes sense because if the jews had a legitimate sense of pride they probably wouldn't feel the need to go and commit genocide and terrorism on defenseless people to overcompensate.

Quote:

Everytime they stop (when there are ceasefires) israel starts bulldozing again.

You mean every time they start? If the Palestinians gave up on violence, the bulldozing would have ended decades ago. The world simply would not have tolerated it. Even today, despite the rockets, many Israelis stand up for Palestinians. Imagine how easy peace would be for the Palestinians if they wanted it?


Quote:

So in your view the Jews should have accepted defeat by the Nazis and not defended themselves?

The Israel-Palestine conflict is nothing at all like the holocaust.


Quote:

They are braver warriors then any soldier from any army in the world, its one thing to go to battle with billions of dollars of firepower.. Try doing it like they do.

I prefer to distinguish brave and stupid. How brave is it to do these things when you know for sure Israel will retaliate and innocent people from your own side will die? Bravery makes no sense in this context, only stupidity.


Quote:

A lot braver then the jews in the holocaust, which makes sense because if the jews had a legitimate sense of pride they probably wouldn't feel the need to go and commit genocide and terrorism on defenseless people to overcompensate.

The Palestinians have waged all out war on Israel, and vastly outnumbered them with their allies. They are hardly defenceless. Right here in this thread we have Falah explaining that a military victory is just around the corner. I agree with you in the sense that they are losing miserably and will continue to do so, but that sort of delusion is still dangerous - hence the rockets and suicide bombers.

You do however demonstrate the misunderstanding in the west. The west sees Palestinians as desperate and defenceless, and think everything would be OK if Israel played softball. On the other hand many Palestinian Muslims (even Australian ones) see themselves as in an ongoing war that they are going to win, and see concessions by Israel as Military victories that demonstrate their own strength. Read Falah's recent posts where he outlines his delusions.

i love holocaust jokes

got anymore, PP?

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 6:58pm:

freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 6:54pm: They don't need to go anywhere. Though if I was there on either side I would try to get anywhere else. They just have to stop firing rockets and deluding themselves that they are about to have a great military victory over Israel. They have to want peace more than victory or death (though it is obviously their choice). They are literally throwing rocks at tanks and imagining themselves warriors. So in your view the Jews should have accepted defeat by the Nazis and not defended themselves? They are braver warriors then any soldier from any army in the world, its one thing to go to battle with billions of dollars of firepower.. Try doing it like they do. A lot braver then the jews in the holocaust, which makes sense because if the jews had a legitimate sense of pride they probably wouldn't feel the need to go and commit genocide and terrorism on defenseless people to overcompensate.

Shut up. You have no idea what genocide is. We Jews has suffered holocaust and we do not commit genocide ever.
Don't say this it is lies.

.

.

After WWI the Germans carried on like today's palestinians (except their situation was nowhere near as hopeless - they were actually in a position where victory was at least possible). So they turned to lunacy and got sucked into another war, which they lost.

After WWII both German and Japan accepted defeat, got over it, and within a generation were better off than many of the societies that defeated them.

Palestinians choose lunacy, war, and more defeat. They reject the path of peace and prosperity, because it is not what they actually want.

freediver - well said


Quote:

............After WWII both German and Japan accepted defeat, got over it, and within a generation were better off than many of the societies that defeated them. Palestinians choose lunacy, war, and more defeat. They reject the path of peace and prosperity, because it is not what they actually want. ......

palestinians and many arabs are disinterested in peace.

If they do want peace with us they make very stupid choices and decisions

See what I mean about the internet and the prevalence of cameras and videos:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1337725259

Now if only they had not been hurling rocks when the cameras were rolling.

freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2012 at 6:21pm:

Quote: Do you consider surrender a praiseworthy act? It is better than refusing to acknowledge you lost a war. Going to the toilet is not a praiseworthy act, but it sure beats crapping on the floor. [quote]More lies Freeliar? Jews lived peacefully under Islamic states for centuries.

See, the Jews can do it, even as second class citizens. But Muslims would rather die, apparently.

[/quote]


LOL, falah, hoisted upon his own petard.






Hey FD,

Maybe the moslems fear conceding defeat to a Jewish nation, because moslems know of the real oppression that Jewish communities suffered for centuries ???

On consideration, nah.

Moslems will never concede 'Palestine' because moslems are simply militant fascists, who want to express their Allah given right,   ......to rape, pillage and plunder those who are not moslems.





ALLAH SAID THAT THE WHOLE EARTH BELONGS TO MOSLEMS, AS WAR 'BOOTY',
...AND MOSLEMS CLEARLY BELIEVE IN ALLAH'S AUTHORITY IN THAT REGARD.

"Or have they gods that can guard them from Us? They have no power to aid themselves, nor can they be defended from Us.
...See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"
Koran 21:43-44


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

I can't see how there can ever be peace in the middle east, between Israel and her neighbours, while ever ISLAM exists.

Either ISLAM will be destroyed, or, ISLAM will destroy Israel.

There can never be, an Israel at peace, in the middle east.

A rampant ISLAM will never allow it.



Dictionary;
rampant = =
1 flourishing or spreading unchecked.
2 unrestrained in action or performance.
3 (of a plant) lush in growth.
4 [usu. postpos.] Heraldry (of an animal) represented standing on its left hind foot with its forefeet in the air.







The simple fact is that a rampant ISLAM cannot, will never, concede to the presence of an [independent] un-ISLAMIC entity, within its own midst.

And that is the problem, with ISLAM;
Wherever ISLAM manages to gain political authority, ISLAM is always intolerant and oppressive, towards anything which could be viewed as un-ISLAMIC.

e.g.
Art, science, music,   .....Jews.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:50pm:

It wasnt an accident.

No, it wasn't.

Rachel Corrie effectively committed suicide.








Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:50pm:

In Australia (and most other countries) you arent allowed to murder ppl.

In Israel, you are not allowed to murder ppl.

If you do, you will be arrested, and charged with murder.






Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:50pm:

If they chain themselves to a tree you have to have the authorities remove them before bulldozing the tree.

Why ?

Aren't they prepared to die for their beliefs ???

Suicide.






Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 12:50pm:

Israelis dont have any compassion though.

Yes they do.

The Israelis, love their children.

While moslems, are happy to murder their children, for the glory of a demon.
.....and in the false hope, of securing for themselves [i.e. the parents], a place in Allah's paradise.


IMAGE
http://ivarfjeld.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/suicide_bomber_1_.jpg


IMAGE
http://ivarfjeld.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/child_suicide_bomber.jpg


IMAGE
http://ivarfjeld.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/hamas2.jpg


IMAGE
http://images.tdaxp.com/tdaxp_upload/female_suicide_bomber_2.jpg


IMAGE
http://www.science.co.il/arab-israeli-conflict/images/girl-suicide-bomber.jpg

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 2:35pm:

I know what war is like. But this isnt about war. Its about israel oppressing palestinians and killing them willy nilly. Bullying with the support of the yanks. Bulldozing their homes and crops. Destroying their wells. etc etc etc. If it was a war then it would be more equal. SOB

You say it.

But it isn't true.





sob,

You are either very ignorant, or, very evil, imo.

I suspect that you just don't want the truth.

On your own head be it.






ISLAM, is a lie.

And E V E R Y  D A Y  -  MOSLEMS LIE

ISLAM......is a false religion, for a false people.

And 'Palestinians' are lying about being oppressed.

'Palestinians' promote murder, in Allah's cause.

Moslems are LIARS, moslems have no shame, moslems lie AND MURDER, for Allah's cause.



Google;
taqiyya - the muslim doctrine of deceit





Google;
palestinian lies media watch

Google;
al dura hoax

Google;
pallywood

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 6:47pm:

Where exactly should the palestinians go? SOB

Saudi Arabia ???




http://www.protestwarrior.com/nimages/signs/large/pw_sign_22.gif

Or isn't there enough room in Saudi Arabia for the 'Palestinians' ?

What ever happened to moslem brotherhood and hospitality  ???




'Palestinians' are a contrived political 'stick' to beat Israel with, on the world stage.

Nothing more.

Yadda,

So when Muslims take over Australia, you won't mind going to Canada or the U.S then to make way for a Muslim who wants to live in your home?

After all Westerners have so many other countries, you don't need Australia... Will you gladly get up and give your home to a Muslim?

ie. Will you apply your same advice to yourself? Or is it only applicable to others? When it suits your agenda?

abu_rashid wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 11:32pm:

Yadda, So when Muslims take over Australia, you won't mind going to Canada or the U.S then to make way for a Muslim who wants to live in your home? After all Westerners have so many other countries, you don't need Australia... Will you gladly get up and give your home to a Muslim? ie. Will you apply your same advice to yourself? Or is it only applicable to others? When it suits your agenda?

This is not as silly as it sounds. It is actually the standard set by Islam. You either welcome the invaders with open arms and become a second class citizen forever, or convert to Islam and become part of the borg, or you end up a slave, or you give up all your land and property to them and bugger off somewhere else (not sure how this last option fits in with Islam's globalist agenda). Other than converting to Islam it is not your choice. It depends on what is deemed to bring most benefit to the Caliphate.

Did I leave out any options Abu?

By comparison, the Muslims of Palestine have it easy.

Quote:

You mean every time they start? If the Palestinians gave up on violence, the bulldozing would have ended decades ago. The world simply would not have tolerated it. Even today, despite the rockets, many Israelis stand up for Palestinians. Imagine how easy peace would be for the Palestinians if they wanted it?

Who breaks the ceasefires?


Quote:

Shut up. You have no idea what genocide is. We Jews has suffered holocaust and we do not commit genocide ever.

the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

Sure looks like you are trying to wipe out the palestinians to me.


Quote:

If they do want peace with us they make very stupid choices and decisions

Oh like not laying down and dying?


Quote:

I can't see how there can ever be peace in the middle east, between Israel and her neighbours, while ever ISLAM exists.

For you this is about wiping out islam. For them its about staying alive and being able to live in a home without being bulldozed.


Quote:

The Israelis, love their children.

But they dont care about any other people.


Quote:

Why ? Aren't they prepared to die for their beliefs ??? Suicide.

So if they are prepared to die its okay to just go and kill them? And you say I am evil? I would never do that!


Quote:

You are either very ignorant, or, very evil, imo.

Muwahahaha


Quote:

Or isn't there enough room in Saudi Arabia for the 'Palestinians' ? What ever happened to moslem brotherhood and hospitality  ???

Obviously you expect another country to have compassion without showing any yourself.


Quote:

You either welcome the invaders with open arms and become a second class citizen forever, or convert to Islam and become part of the borg, or you end up a slave, or you give up all your land and property to them and bugger off somewhere else (not sure how this last option fits in with Islam's globalist agenda).

Lol

SOB

Quote:

Who breaks the ceasefires?

Borg, this requires a frank look at the evidence, not spin doctoring. Take this as an example:

Country A attacks B on day X in history.

80 days later country B defends itself.

3 hours later country A launches yet another unprovoked attack.

This time it takes B a bit longer to summon it's resources, but manages to respond in 130 days.

87 minutes later country A again launches another completely unprovoked attack.

...and so on

How would you interpret this?


Quote:

Sure looks like you are trying to wipe out the palestinians to me.

I think you have completely failed to grasp the situation. If this is what they wanted, they could do it easily and quickly, and would not let the Palestinians fire rockets into Israel. By any other historical standard, they would have wiped them out.


Quote:

Oh like not laying down and dying?

Like firing rockets from residential areas into Israel, so that the return fire ends up killing innocent people. How is this anything but idiotic on the part of the Palestinians?


Quote:

For you this is about wiping out islam. For them its about staying alive and being able to live in a home without being bulldozed.

Borg, try reading what people actually post. Avram has said he is willing to live peacefully with Palestinian neighbours. Yet here we have Abu and Falah saying the Palestinians should never surrender and are about to have a great military victory. Falah even thinks they have already had victories over Israel. And this comes from Muslims with now personal involvement or experience, so no direct reason to be bitter. Now be honest - which side is the barrier to peace?


Quote:

But they dont care about any other people.

Again, look to the reality. There are plenty of Israeli NGOs helping out Palestinians. Obviously this is not going to extend to ignoring the rockets landing in their cities and talk from idiots like Falah about ongoing wars.

Your view of history is erroneous Falah

It is one thing to sign a peace treaty, another thing to surrender. We have seen what happens to those who made the mistake of surrender eg. Catholics genocided Muslims and Jews in Spain

I have corrected you before, but will try once more.

In 1066 the Muslims in Spain slaughtered between 3500 and 7000 Jews. The Jews Muslims were expelled from Spain when the Spaniards reclaimed THEIR LAND. Jews and Muslims were given the chance to convert to Christianity, if they refused were expelled with no possessions ( the Muslims stole them from others anyway ).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1066_Granada_massacre

No such chance was given to these poor buggers by Muslims.  http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/featured/skull-cathedral-otranto-bones-martyrs-adorn-walls/9100

Muslims killed more people in 1066 than over the entire period of the Spanish inquisition.   http://askville.amazon.com/people-killed-Inquisition/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=3878676

I realise it is difficult for Muslims to have a honest opinion as they rote so little history about their murderous expansion, perhaps they were even disgusted by the atrocities they committed.

Adamant wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 11:01am:

Your view of history is erroneous Falah It is one thing to sign a peace treaty, another thing to surrender. We have seen what happens to those who made the mistake of surrender eg. Catholics genocided Muslims and Jews in Spain I have corrected you before, but will try once more. In 1066 the Muslims in Spain slaughtered between 3500 and 7000 Jews. The Jews Muslims were expelled from Spain when the Spaniards reclaimed THEIR LAND. Jews and Muslims were given the chance to convert to Christianity, if they refused were expelled with no possessions ( the Muslims stole them from others anyway ).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1066_Granada_massacre

Quite odd that the oldest source quoted in the wikipedia entry is a Jewish Encyclopedia 1906.

If you read the whole wikipedia entry it says this of the dubious Jewish claims of a massacre:


Quote:

Lewis continues: "Diatribes such as Abu Ishaq's and massacres such as that in Granada in 1066 are of rare occurrence in Islamic history."

Adamant wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 11:01am:

No such chance was given to these poor buggers by Muslims.  http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/featured/skull-cathedral-otranto-bones-martyrs-adorn-walls/9100

The Church is used as propaganda by Christians. Ottoman historians said that the bones were collected from the battlefield and came from the 1300 Italian soldiers who took part in the battle.




Adamant wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 11:01am:

Muslims killed more people in 1066 than over the entire period of the Spanish inquisition.

That is obviously a pretty dodgy statement. It is well documented that Jews and Christians lived peacefully and prosperously in Islamic Spain.

You present some dodgy statistics, which are not based on evidence.

What we do know for sure is that there were no non-Catholics left in Spain once the killer Catholics took control of the country.

falah wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 11:56am:

Adamant wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 11:01am: Your view of history is erroneous Falah It is one thing to sign a peace treaty, another thing to surrender. We have seen what happens to those who made the mistake of surrender eg. Catholics genocided Muslims and Jews in Spain I have corrected you before, but will try once more. In 1066 the Muslims in Spain slaughtered between 3500 and 7000 Jews. The Jews Muslims were expelled from Spain when the Spaniards reclaimed THEIR LAND. Jews and Muslims were given the chance to convert to Christianity, if they refused were expelled with no possessions ( the Muslims stole them from others anyway ).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1066_Granada_massacre Quite odd that the oldest source quoted in the wikipedia entry is a Jewish Encyclopedia 1906. If you read the whole wikipedia entry it says this of the dubious Jewish claims of a massacre: Quote: Lewis continues: "Diatribes such as Abu Ishaq's and massacres such as that in Granada in 1066 are of rare occurrence in Islamic history."

So it was rare for Muslims to kill more people in a single year in one area than the entire history of the spanish inquisition?

Muhammed himself killed and oversaw the killing of more than enough people. This includes Jews who you claim lived 'peacefully' under Muslim oppression for the entire history of Islam.

Quote:

Borg, this requires a frank look at the evidence, not spin doctoring. Take this as an example:

How the heck was a google search "spin doctoring"?


Quote:

How would you interpret this?

you are joking. lol. Its not funny though if this is how you see it.


Quote:

I think you have completely failed to grasp the situation. If this is what they wanted, they could do it easily and quickly, and would not let the Palestinians fire rockets into Israel. By any other historical standard, they would have wiped them out.

They would if they could. They are afraid they will lose the support of america etc if they do that though.

The avram vs abu etc thing is not representative of all muslims or all jews. The facts are that israel wont give them a fair go.


Quote:

Again, look to the reality. There are plenty of Israeli NGOs helping out Palestinians. Obviously this is not going to extend to ignoring the rockets landing in their cities and talk from idiots like Falah about ongoing wars.

Apparently the ones doing the bulldozing are private contractors hired by zionists i suppose. This is supposed to absolve them of any blame.

SOB

Yadda wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 11:24pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 6:47pm: Where exactly should the palestinians go? SOB Saudi Arabia ??? Or isn't there enough room in Saudi Arabia for the 'Palestinians' ? What ever happened to moslem brotherhood and hospitality  ??? 'Palestinians' are a contrived political 'stick' to beat Israel with, on the world stage. Nothing more.

abu_rashid wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 11:32pm:

Yadda, So when Muslims take over Australia, you won't mind going to Canada or the U.S then to make way for a Muslim who wants to live in your home? After all Westerners have so many other countries, you don't need Australia... Will you gladly get up and give your home to a Muslim? ie. Will you apply your same advice to yourself? Or is it only applicable to others? When it suits your agenda?

Abu,

1/
ISLAM ???

2/
The Ummah ???

Are those two entities just figments of our kuffar imagination ???



Dictionary;
umma = = the whole community of Muslims bound together by ties of religion.




Abu,

A moslem has a special relationship with every other moslem.

ISLAM itself dictates and obligates such a relationship among moslems.


"It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces Towards east or West; but it is righteousness- to believe in Allah and the Last Day, and the Angels, and the Book, and the Messengers; to spend of your substance, out of love for Him, for your kin, for orphans, for the needy, for the wayfarer, for those who ask, and for the ransom of slaves; to be steadfast in prayer, and practice regular charity; to fulfil the contracts which ye have made; and to be firm and patient, in pain (or suffering) and adversity, and throughout all periods of panic. Such are the people of truth, the Allah-fearing."
Koran 8.41

"And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah,- and to the Messenger, and to near relatives, orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer,- if ye do believe in Allah and in the revelation We sent down to Our servant on the Day of Testing,- the Day of the meeting of the two forces. For Allah hath power over all things."
Koran 8.41

etc, etc, etc, 'moslem piety', etc, add infinitum.

BUT NOT 'moslem piety' FOR ANY 'Palestinian'.      SPIT!      SPIT!!

Clearly, Allah's curse, is on any moslem who materially helps his 'Palestinian' brothers and sisters, or would take them in !!!
/sac off





So Abu, if the 'Palestinian people' have been dispossessed by those evil Zionists [n.b. the Jewish people have merely taken back what is their own ancient home land, that was taken from the Jewish people, by others], why can their moslem 'brothers' help them, and absorb the 'poor' 'Palestinian people' into their own communities ???


Abu,

AS MOSLEMS, why are moslems refusing to 'take in' into the Ummah, the dispossessed 'Palestinian people'  ???

Have moslems lost all of their pity for their 'Palestinian' brothers and sisters ???

Again, isn't there enough room in Saudi Arabia for the dispossessed 'Palestinians' ?

http://www.protestwarrior.com/nimages/signs/large/pw_sign_22.gif






+++





Hey Abu,

If moslem invaders are 'righteous' in stealing all of these lands by force of the sword;

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

http://www.jihadwatch.org/Turkish%20Wave.jpg

THEN PLEASE EXPLAIN, WHY IS IT WRONG FOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE TO TAKE BACK THEIR OWN ANCIENT HOMELAND, AND TO DEFEND IT BY FORCE OF ARMS ???





IMAGE SOURCE
http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101.html

freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 12:22pm:

falah wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 11:56am: Adamant wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 11:01am: Your view of history is erroneous Falah It is one thing to sign a peace treaty, another thing to surrender. We have seen what happens to those who made the mistake of surrender eg. Catholics genocided Muslims and Jews in Spain I have corrected you before, but will try once more. In 1066 the Muslims in Spain slaughtered between 3500 and 7000 Jews. The Jews Muslims were expelled from Spain when the Spaniards reclaimed THEIR LAND. Jews and Muslims were given the chance to convert to Christianity, if they refused were expelled with no possessions ( the Muslims stole them from others anyway ).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1066_Granada_massacre Quite odd that the oldest source quoted in the wikipedia entry is a Jewish Encyclopedia 1906. If you read the whole wikipedia entry it says this of the dubious Jewish claims of a massacre: Quote: Lewis continues: "Diatribes such as Abu Ishaq's and massacres such as that in Granada in 1066 are of rare occurrence in Islamic history." So it was rare for Muslims to kill more people in a single year in one area than the entire history of the spanish inquisition?

Can you provide any evidence to support your assertion Freeliar - apart from a Jewish encyclopedia written in 1906?



freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 12:22pm:

Muhammed himself killed and oversaw the killing of more than enough people. This includes Jews who you claim lived 'peacefully' under Muslim oppression for the entire history of Islam.

The Jews were protected in the Madina until they started molesting women, committing murders, helping enemies of the state and plotting to murder Prophet Muhammed, peace & blessing of God upon him.

Initially Prophet Muhammed tried to protect the Jews until their crimes became too much.

Initially the Jews committed murders secretly and would attack lone Muslims. A lone Muslim was killed in the Jewish town of Khaybar. In order, to maintain peace, prophet Muhammed paid compensation to the family of the murder victim out of his own property:


Quote:

A man of the Ansar was killed at Khaybar and his relatives went to the Prophet  and mentioned that to him. He asked: Have you two witnesses who can testify to the murderer of your friend? They replied: "Messenger of God! there was not a single Muslim present, but only jews who sometimes have the audacity to do even greater crimes than this. He said: Then choose fifty of them and demand that they take an oath; but they refused and the Prophet paid the blood-money himself. [Bukhari]

Quote:

Abdullah ibn Sahl al-Ansari and Muhayyisa ibn Masud went out to Khaybar, and they separated on their various businesses and Abdullah ibn Sahl was killed... ...Muhayyisa returned and said that Abdullah ibn Sahl had been killed and thrown in a shallow well or spring. The jews came and he said, "By God! You have killed him."...The Messenger of God gave blood-money from his own property, and sent them one hundred camels to their house. [al-Muwatta]

The first tribe of Jews were expelled from Madina after molesting a Muslim woman and the mob-killing of a Muslim man openly in the jewish market.


Quote:

Their behaviour grew too impolite and unbearable. They started a process of trouble-making, jeering at the Muslims, hurting those who frequented their bazaars, and even intimidating their women. Such things began to aggravate the general situation, so the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) gathered them in assemblage, admonished and called them to be rational, sensible and guided and cautioned against further transgression. Nevertheless they remained obdurate and paid no heed to his warning, and said: "Don’t be deluded on account of defeating some Quraishites inexperienced in the art of war. If you were to engage us in fight, you will realize that we are genuine war experts." In this regard, the Words of God were revealed saying: [quote]Say to those who disbelieve: ‘You will be defeated and gathered together to Hell, and worst indeed is that place to rest.’ There has already been a Sign for you (O Jews) in the two armies that met (in the battle of Badr): One was fighting in the cause of God, and as for the other (they) were disbelievers. They (the believers) saw them (the disbelievers) with their own eyes twice their number. And God supports with His Victory whom He pleases. Verily, in this is a lesson for those who understand." [Al-Qur'an 3:12,13] [Sunan Abu Da'ud with Aunul-Ma'bood 3/115; Ibn Hisham 1/552]

The answer of the Qunaiqa Tribe amounted, as seen, to war declaration. The Prophet suppressed his anger and advised the Muslims to be patient and forbearing and wait for what time might reveal.

The Jews, went too far in their transgression, presumptuous behaviour and licentious practices. One day a Jewish goldsmith provoked a Muslim woman whose genitals become uncovered when he had tied the edge of the garment to her back. A Muslim man happened to be there and killed the man; the Jews retaliated by killing that Muslim. The man’s family called the Muslims for help and war started. [Ibn Hisham 2/47,48]

On Saturday, Shawwal 15th, 2 A.H., the Prophet marched out with his soldiers, Hamzah bin ‘Abdul Muttalib carrying the standard of the Muslims, and laid siege to the Jews’ forts for 15 days. God cast fear into their hearts, and they were obliged to defer to the Messenger’s judgement on their lives, wealth, women and children; their hands were tied behind their backs.

At this point, Abdullah bin Ubai bin Salul...began to intercede for them (Jews) persistently on grounds of a former alliance between those Jews and His tribe, the Khazraj. Muhammad...granted him his request...After that they were banished out of all Arabia to Azru‘a in Syria
[Ar-Raheeq al-Makhtum, al-Mubarakpuri]
[/quote]

The Jewish Nadir and Quraiza tribes were permitted to stay until they broke their peace treaty and fought against the Muslims, with the Nadir tribe being the main offenders in breaking peace treaties with Muslims initially, after being pressured by the Meccans pagans who were furious at being defeated by Muslims at the Battle of Badr:



Quote:

...The (Meccan) pagans of the Quraysh (tribe) again wrote (a letter) to the Jews after the Battle of Badr: "You are men of weapons and fortresses. You should fight our companion (Muhammed) or we shall deal with you in a certain way. And nothing will come between us and the anklets of your women."...(so) they gathered the Nadir tribe to violate the treaty. They sent a message to the Prophet: "Come out to us with thirty men from your companions, and thirty rabbis will come out from us till we meet at a central place where they will hear you. If they testify to you and believe in you, we shall believe in you."...When the next day came, the Messenger of God went out in the morning with an army, and surrounded them. He told them: "I swear by God, you will have no peace from me until you conclude a treaty with me. But they refused to conclude a treaty with him. He therefore fought them the same day. Next he attacked the Quraysh tribe with an army in the morning, and left the Nadir tribe. He asked them (Quraysh) to sign a treaty and they signed it. He turned away from them and attacked the Nadir tribe with an army. He fought with them until they agreed to expulsion. The Nadir tribe were deported, and they took with them whatever their camels could carry, that is, their property, the doors of their houses, and their wood. [Bukhari]

Quote:

Narrated Ibn Umar: The Nadir tribe and Quraiza tribe fought (against the Muslims violating their peace treaty), so the Prophet exiled the Nadir tribe and allowed the Quraiza tribe to remain at their places (in Medina) taking nothing from them till they fought against the Prophet again (a second time). He then killed their men and distributed their women, children and property among the Muslims, but some of them came to the Prophet and he granted them safety, and they embraced Islam. He then exiled all the Jews from Medina. [Bukhari]

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 8:33am:

Quote: Or isn't there enough room in Saudi Arabia for the 'Palestinians' ? What ever happened to moslem brotherhood and hospitality  ??? Obviously you expect another country to have compassion without showing any yourself.

If another country, and other persons, want to show compassion to persons who believe that they have the right to rob, rape, pillage, and murder other human beings, that is their choice.

I will not assist CRIMINALS, in their CRIMINAL endeavours.      [i.e. therefore becoming a criminal myself!!]

I would rather incarcerate criminals, separating criminals FROM the rest of society.







A person would have to be demented to welcome into their home, or, into their nation, moslems, who's philosophy [ISLAM] teaches them that they [moslems] may 'lawfully' rob, rape, pillage, and murder their hosts [ <--- people who have given them sanctuary!! ], .......and that such behaviour is 'lawful' because their hosts do not believe as they [moslems] believe.


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

From ISLAMIC law texts, declaring how moslems should treat those who abandon ISLAM [i.e. those who are not moslems]....

"Ibn 'Abbas reported that the Prophet said: "The bare essence of Islam and the basics of the religion are three [acts], upon which Islam has been established. Whoever leaves one of them becomes an unbeliever and his blood may legally be spilled. [The acts are:] Testifying that there is no God except Allah, the obligatory prayers, and the fast of Ramadan."...."
fiqhussunnah/fus3_50.html#3.110

n.b. "Whoever......becomes an unbeliever.....his blood may legally be spilled."






Every moslem who has been given sanctuary in Australia, openly declares that he has embraced ISLAM, including ISLAM's tenets and laws.

And ISLAM teaches those very moslems from childhood, that 'unbelievers' have no protection in their moslem society, and that their duty, their obligation to ISLAM, is to destroy the un-ISLAMIC community [ the community which has given those moslems sanctuary], and to replace that society with ISLAMIC law.


1/    "...Allah is an enemy to those who reject Faith." [i.e. 'Unbelief' [in man] is a crime.].
Koran 2.98
[ - - All of 'unbelieving' mankind, are the declared enemy of moslems.]


2/    "...those who reject Allah have no protector."
Koran 47:8-11


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

falah wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 2:06pm:

The Jewish Nadir and Quraiza tribes were permitted to stay until they broke their peace treaty and fought against the Muslims, with the Nadir tribe being the main offenders in breaking peace treaties with Muslims initially, after being pressured by the Meccans pagans who were furious at being defeated by Muslims at the Battle of Badr:

In the time of Mohammed, Jewish communities in Saudi Arabia were being oppressed and pillaged by moslems.

Why?

Simply because many of the Jews refused to relinquish Judaism, and adopt ISLAM.


"While we were in the mosque, Allah's Apostle came out to us and said, "Let us proceed to the Jews." So we went along with him till we reached Bait-al-Midras (a place where the Torah used to be recited and all the Jews of the town used to gather). The Prophet stood up and addressed them, "O Assembly of Jews! Embrace Islam and you will be safe!" The Jews replied, "O Aba-l-Qasim! You have conveyed Allah's message to us." The Prophet said, "That is what I want (from you)." He repeated his first statement for the second time, and they said, "You have conveyed Allah's message, O Aba-l-Qasim." Then he said it for the third time and added, "You should Know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to exile you from, this land, so whoever among you owns some property, can sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle.""
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #009.085.077
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.053.392





Moslems are liars, who can do no wrong, in their own eyes.

Moslems are always making excuses, and always portraying THEIR INTENDED VICTIMS as the aggressors,   .......when the truth is that it is >> always << the moslems themselves, who are always making threats of violence, against those who are not moslems.

Quote:

The avram vs abu etc thing is not representative of all muslims or all jews. The facts are that israel wont give them a fair go.

It only takes a small number of Muslims like Abu and Falah to create the violence, but it takes a much bigger proportion of the population to condone the violence and fail to reign it in. I am sure the Israelis would prefer the Palestinians to take responsibility for any rockets that get launched from Palestine and lock up the people who do this. Do you think that will ever happen, even if the result is Palestinians dying in response? It will not happen because the Palestinian people actually support ongoing violence and want a military victory, no matter how unlikely, more than they want peace. After all, they have literally made a religion of winning wars and ruling over Jews.


Quote:

The Jews were protected in the Madina until they started molesting women, committing murders, helping enemies of the state and plotting to murder Prophet Muhammed, peace & blessing of God upon him

Yes Falah we know there is always an excuse when Muslims slaughter people and the Muslims are always blameless. Just like if a Palestinian launches rockets into Israel from his rooftop and his children die in the return fire, it is the Israeli's fault his children died. Islam absolves him of any responsibility for his own actions or the need to think for himself.

The point is, the Jews obviously did not live in peace the whole time. But when it became obvious their only choice was submit or die, they chose to live. Muslims on the other hand choose to die.

If those Jews had behaved anything at all like today's Palestinians, there would be no trace left of them. Palestinians are given more rope to hang themselves with than any other people in the history of the world. Israel is the most generous victor there has ever been. But you are incapable of putting any of this into perspective, even when the facts are staring you in the face, because Islam is blind to reality and born to rule.

falah wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 9:16am:

freediver wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 8:19am: Quote: But too I believe Palestinians can exist as neighbours to us. I wonder if Abu and Falah could reciprocate this gesture without qualifying it as temporary or some other silly attempt at deception. I believe Israelis can live as good neighbours as soon as they get off stolen Palestinian land.

And go where?

What about the ones who didn't steal anything or who legitimately bought their land?

Avram is not suggesting the Palestinians can only be neighbours if they move to Uzbhekistan. Peace can start as soon as the Palestinians give up on yours and Abu's lunatic belief that they are going to force the Israelis into the sea.

Quote:

THEN PLEASE EXPLAIN, WHY IS IT WRONG FOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE TO TAKE BACK THEIR OWN ANCIENT HOMELAND, AND TO DEFEND IT BY FORCE OF ARMS ???

How is it the jews? Is someone else living there?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:39pm:

Quote: THEN PLEASE EXPLAIN, WHY IS IT WRONG FOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE TO TAKE BACK THEIR OWN ANCIENT HOMELAND, AND TO DEFEND IT BY FORCE OF ARMS ??? How is it the jews? Is someone else living there? SOB

We have been on this land since the begin of time my friend.

Abu and Falah like to pretend there were no Jews at all in Israel and they all turned up in 1948 with guns and forced the Palestinians out.

freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:09pm:

Quote: The avram vs abu etc thing is not representative of all muslims or all jews. The facts are that israel wont give them a fair go. It only takes a small number of Muslims like Abu and Falah to create the violence

It is evil-minded people like you Freeliar who condone and support the violent Israeli invasion and occupation of Palestinian land. You are the violent one.




freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:09pm:

Quote: The Jews were protected in the Madina until they started molesting women, committing murders, helping enemies of the state and plotting to murder Prophet Muhammed, peace & blessing of God upon him Yes Falah we know there is always an excuse when Muslims slaughter people and the Muslims are always blameless. Just like if a Palestinian launches rockets into Israel from his rooftop and his children die in the return fire, it is the Israeli's fault his children died.

Garbage Freeliar. Less than 0.1% of Palestinian population involved in firing a virtually useless homemade rocket is not the same as about 50% of a Jewish tribe being involved in a violent public homicide following a a Jewish sexual assault.


The Israelis can end the violence now by giving the Palestinians their land back. It is simple.




freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:09pm:

Islam absolves him of any responsibility for his own actions or the need to think for himself.

Freeliar lies again.




freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:09pm:

The point is, the Jews obviously did not live in peace the whole time. But when it became obvious their only choice was submit or die, they chose to live. Muslims on the other hand choose to die.

Totally incorrect. The Jewish tribes of Madina were warned many times to honour their treaties and were given many warnings before they were expelled - and most of them were expelled not killed. They were expelled because they kept violating their promises and treaties. They were treated on a case by case basis, but each Jewish tribe in Madina eventually broke their treaties and acted treacherously - some more so than others.




freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:09pm:

If those Jews had behaved anything at all like today's Palestinians, there would be no trace left of them.

There is a big difference Freeliar. The Muslims were invited to Madina. The Jews were one of the parties that agreed to invite the Muslims and live with Muhammed as a ruler. The Jews signed treaties in Madina promising not to attack the Muslim and help them defend the city. The Jews broke their promises and attacked Madina.


The Palestinian, on the other hand, never invited the Jews to come and rule Palestine.

The Jews offer provocation after provocation. Stealing land, stealing more land, bombing civilians. The Jews were offered peace many times but their greed prevented them from ever making a peace deal.

Put simply, the Israeli Jews will never make peace because, as their rejection of every peace demonstrates, their greed is overwhelming.

freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:47pm:

Abu and Falah like to pretend there were no Jews at all in Israel and they all turned up in 1948 with guns and forced the Palestinians out.

It is true that the Muslims kindly allowed the Jews to return to Palestine after the Romans/Byzantine had expelled them for 600 years. But before the 20th century, there were only a few thousand Jews in palestine.

Even by 1948, the Jews did not own much land in Palestine as these maps demonstrate:

http://asitoughttobe.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/1948-2000.jpg

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:44pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 6:39pm: Quote: THEN PLEASE EXPLAIN, WHY IS IT WRONG FOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE TO TAKE BACK THEIR OWN ANCIENT HOMELAND, AND TO DEFEND IT BY FORCE OF ARMS ??? How is it the jews? Is someone else living there? SOB We have been on this land since the begin of time my friend.

The beginning of time? I thought the UN gave you israel in the 60s?

Or are you referring to one of the fictional books?

SOB

freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:25pm:

falah wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 9:16am: freediver wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 8:19am: Quote: But too I believe Palestinians can exist as neighbours to us. I wonder if Abu and Falah could reciprocate this gesture without qualifying it as temporary or some other silly attempt at deception. I believe Israelis can live as good neighbours as soon as they get off stolen Palestinian land. And go where?

Wherever they came from.


freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:25pm:

What about the ones who didn't steal anything or who legitimately bought their land?

If they have not committed crimes, then could keep what they owned.


freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:25pm:

Avram is not suggesting the Palestinians can only be neighbours if they move to Uzbhekistan. Peace can start as soon as the Palestinians give up on yours and Abu's lunatic belief that they are going to force the Israelis into the sea.

Freeliar, where did I ever say that was my belief. Don't you ever feel ashamed of lying?

Wherever we come from?
I was born in Tel Aviv. That is where I come from.

Quote:

It is evil-minded people like you Freeliar who condone and support the violent Israeli invasion and occupation of Palestinian land. You are the violent one

I think they should make peace. You and Abu are the only ones calling for more war.


Quote:

Garbage Freeliar. Less than 0.1% of Palestinian population involved in firing a virtually useless homemade rocket is not the same as about 50% of a Jewish tribe being involved in a violent public homicide following a a Jewish sexual assault.

Wrong Falah. Your own examples back up my position. You are just too blind to see. According to you, a few isolated crimes, one or two dead Muslims, is enough excuse to kick the Jewish tribe out of the expanding empire


Quote:

The first tribe of Jews were expelled from Madina after molesting a Muslim woman and the mob-killing of a Muslim man openly in the jewish market.

But you expect Israel to politely put up with Palestinians firing every rocket they can get their hands on into Israel. It is a ludicrous double standard.


Quote:

The Israelis can end the violence now by giving the Palestinians their land back. It is simple.

Time for some perspective Falah. If those Jews had responded to Muhammed kicking them off their land by telling Muhammed he can only have peace with them if he gives it all back, what would Muhammed have done? He would have slaughtered every last one of them.


Quote:

and most of them were expelled not killed

How generous of the Muslims, only taking their land and not their lives. If only the Israelis were so generous to the Palestinians. Oops.


Quote:

They were treated on a case by case basis, but each Jewish tribe in Madina

So the Israelis should split the Palestinians up into tribes and boot the whole tribe out of Palestine if they don't heed the warnings not to fire rockets?


Quote:

There is a big difference Freeliar. The Muslims were invited to Madina

The Jews have been in Israel since before Islam existed. More Jews were invited into Israel. You appear to think that Muhammed was the only one who can invite people or be invited anywhere.


Quote:

The Jews signed treaties in Madina promising not to attack the Muslim and help them defend the city. The Jews broke their promises and attacked Madina.

Tell me falah, if the Jews had refused to sign those treaties on the grounds that they were about to have a great victory over Muhammed, what would muhammed have done? That's right, he would have slaughtered every last one of them. If only the Israelis were equally generous.

Your attempts to paint Muslims as the eternal victims and never at fault is getting absurd Falah. Eventually they have to take responsibility for their own actions.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 6:59pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 6:44pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 6:39pm: Quote: THEN PLEASE EXPLAIN, WHY IS IT WRONG FOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE TO TAKE BACK THEIR OWN ANCIENT HOMELAND, AND TO DEFEND IT BY FORCE OF ARMS ??? How is it the jews? Is someone else living there? SOB We have been on this land since the begin of time my friend. The beginning of time? I thought the UN gave you israel in the 60s? Or are you referring to one of the fictional books? SOB

The land of Israel and its people are centuries old.

Yadda wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 2:28pm:

falah wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 2:06pm: The Jewish Nadir and Quraiza tribes were permitted to stay until they broke their peace treaty and fought against the Muslims, with the Nadir tribe being the main offenders in breaking peace treaties with Muslims initially, after being pressured by the Meccans pagans who were furious at being defeated by Muslims at the Battle of Badr: In the time of Mohammed, Jewish communities in Saudi Arabia were being oppressed and pillaged by moslems. Why? Simply because many of the Jews refused to relinquish Judaism, and adopt ISLAM.

This is false Yadda, the Jews had invited Muhammed to come to Madina and be their ruler. The Jews had signed treaties promising to protect the Islamic state. The Jews broke their treaties and attacked the Islamic state. This was grounds for their expulsion. Some of the Jewish tribes had been more treacherous than other. Despite their many crimes, Prophet Muhammed mercifully gave the tribe deemed least treacherous one last chance to stay if they converted to Islam. Some of the Jews dedcided to take up the offer and converted o Islam, others left.

This was all done on a case by case basis. Over the years, all the Jewish tribes in Madina proved themselves to be treacherous and broke their treaties with the Muslims.

There were other Jews living under the islamic state, like those in Yemen. The Yemeni Jews did not break treaties, and therefore were not expelled from Yemen. In fact most of the Yemeni jews converted to Islam, but many remained Jewish and till this day there are many Yemeni Jews.

There are 1.5m Arab Israelis.

Quote:

Prophet Muhammed mercifully gave the tribe deemed least treacherous one last chance to stay if they converted to Islam.

Wow, that is generous. Why on earth would the Jews want their own homeland after being treated so well?

This 'converting to Islam' thing - is that any different to reverting? Does it carry with it a death penalty for changing their mind?

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 7:06pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 6:59pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 6:44pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 6:39pm: Quote: THEN PLEASE EXPLAIN, WHY IS IT WRONG FOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE TO TAKE BACK THEIR OWN ANCIENT HOMELAND, AND TO DEFEND IT BY FORCE OF ARMS ??? How is it the jews? Is someone else living there? SOB We have been on this land since the begin of time my friend. The beginning of time? I thought the UN gave you israel in the 60s? Or are you referring to one of the fictional books? SOB The land of Israel and its people are centuries old.

That doesnt answer my question.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 7:26pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 7:06pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 6:59pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 6:44pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 6:39pm: Quote: THEN PLEASE EXPLAIN, WHY IS IT WRONG FOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE TO TAKE BACK THEIR OWN ANCIENT HOMELAND, AND TO DEFEND IT BY FORCE OF ARMS ??? How is it the jews? Is someone else living there? SOB We have been on this land since the begin of time my friend. The beginning of time? I thought the UN gave you israel in the 60s? Or are you referring to one of the fictional books? SOB The land of Israel and its people are centuries old. That doesnt answer my question. SOB

The UN did not give us anything.
Under Ben Gurion my grandparents generation created Israel.

Land of Israel is centuries old.

Beginning of time eh? That would be in the big bang era.
Lissen! religions are fantasies and are inherently evil.
Where would this conflict be if religion wasn't involved.
The human race is the most disgusting species on the planet.
(not counting me)

bludger wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 8:18pm:

Beginning of time eh? That would be in the big bang era. Lissen! religions are fantasies and are inherently evil. Where would this conflict be if religion wasn't involved. The human race is the most disgusting species on the planet. (not counting me)

LOL

Of course.

You, are excused from that despicable group of miscreants.      ;D




Hey bludger,

You and me, could solve all of the worlds problems,   .....honest.           ;)

falah wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 7:10pm:

Yadda wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 2:28pm: falah wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 2:06pm: The Jewish Nadir and Quraiza tribes were permitted to stay until they broke their peace treaty and fought against the Muslims, with the Nadir tribe being the main offenders in breaking peace treaties with Muslims initially, after being pressured by the Meccans pagans who were furious at being defeated by Muslims at the Battle of Badr: In the time of Mohammed, Jewish communities in Saudi Arabia were being oppressed and pillaged by moslems. Why? Simply because many of the Jews refused to relinquish Judaism, and adopt ISLAM. This is false Yadda, the Jews had invited Muhammed to come to Madina and be their ruler. The Jews had signed treaties promising to protect the Islamic state. The Jews broke their treaties and attacked the Islamic state. This was grounds for their expulsion. Some of the Jewish tribes had been more treacherous than other. Despite their many crimes, Prophet Muhammed mercifully gave the tribe deemed least treacherous one last chance to stay if they converted to Islam. Some of the Jews dedcided to take up the offer and converted o Islam, others left. This was all done on a case by case basis. Over the years, all the Jewish tribes in Madina proved themselves to be treacherous and broke their treaties with the Muslims. There were other Jews living under the islamic state, like those in Yemen. The Yemeni Jews did not break treaties, and therefore were not expelled from Yemen. In fact most of the Yemeni jews converted to Islam, but many remained Jewish and till this day there are many Yemeni Jews.

hey falah,

Get a clue.

I no longer believe moslem 'narratives'.

ANY moslem 'narrative'.

Every time i encounter a post by falah, i scan it, FOR OBVIOUS LIES.

e.g.
"......Despite their many crimes, Prophet Muhammed mercifully gave the tribe deemed least treacherous one last chance.....all the Jewish tribes in Madina proved themselves to be treacherous and broke their treaties with the Muslims"    yadda, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Moslem PROJECTION.

It was Mohammed and the moslems, who broke all of their agreements, with all non-moslem communities.

falah,

Who broke the treaty of Al-Hudaibiya ?







+++


Moslems are LIARS, for Allah's cause.

Moslems just can't help themselves.



Google;
taqiyya - the muslim doctrine of deceit





Google;
palestinian lies media watch

Google;
al dura hoax

Google;
pallywood

Yadda, your posts are models of the Christian pamphlet genre.

Have you thought of writing them for a living?

There's big money in Christian pamphlets these days.

Mattyfisk wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:48pm:

Yadda, your posts are models of the Christian pamphlet genre. Have you thought of writing them for a living? There's big money in Christian pamphlets these days.

Oh wow!

Do you really think i could make it big ?

falah wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 7:10pm:

the Jews had invited Muhammed to come to Madina and be their ruler. The Jews had signed treaties promising to protect the Islamic state. The Jews broke their treaties and attacked the Islamic state. This was grounds for their expulsion. Some of the Jewish tribes had been more treacherous than other. Despite their many crimes, Prophet Muhammed mercifully gave the tribe deemed least treacherous one last chance to stay if they converted to Islam. Some of the Jews dedcided to take up the offer and converted o Islam, others left. This was all done on a case by case basis. Over the years, all the Jewish tribes in Madina proved themselves to be treacherous and broke their treaties with the Muslims. There were other Jews living under the islamic state, like those in Yemen. The Yemeni Jews did not break treaties, and therefore were not expelled from Yemen. In fact most of the Yemeni jews converted to Islam, but many remained Jewish and till this day there are many Yemeni Jews.

There is no limit if you a paranoid delusional, is there?

Say it - the Jews invited the pbuh guy to kill them for being naughty boys. go on. That's the gist of what you are saying.

But if a Westerner, let alone a Jew, says today - hey, the Arabs have been warned, they didn't heed the warnings and didn't desist so we killed them - you go all human rights and liberation theology.

The thing, galah, is that intellectually Islam is negligiible so guys like you an the bearded monsters resort to theats and violence. you couldn't mount a cohesive argument, so you kill.

falah wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 7:10pm:

the Jews had invited Muhammed to come to Madina and be their ruler.

There is no limit to paranoid delusion, is there?
No.

Soren wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:27pm:

falah wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 7:10pm: the Jews had invited Muhammed to come to Madina and be their ruler. There is no limit to paranoid delusion, is there? No.

It is fact. Prophet Muhammed (peace & blessings of God upon him) did not have an army when he went to Madina, how did he become ruler without negotiations?


Provisions of a treaty made with Jews of Madina:


Quote:

The most important provisions of the treaty are the following: 1. The Jews of the ‘Awf tribe are one community with the believers (Muslims). The Jews will profess their religion, and the Muslims theirs. 2. The Jews shall be responsible for their expenditure, and the Muslims for theirs. 3. If attacked by a third party, each shall come to the assistance of the other. 4. Each party shall hold counsel with the other. Mutual relation shall be founded on righteousness; sin is totally excluded. 5. Neither shall commit sins to the prejudice of the other. 6. The wronged party shall be aided. 7. The Jews shall contribute to the cost of war so long as they are fighting alongside the believers (Muslims). 8. Madinah shall remain sacred and inviolable for all that join this treaty. 9. Should any disagreement arise between the signatories to this treaty, then God, the All-High and His Messenger shall settle the dispute. 10. The signatories to this treaty shall boycott Quraish (tribe of Mecca who had stolen property from the Muslims) commercially; they shall also abstain from extending any support to them. 11. Each shall contribute to defending Madinah, in case of a foreign attack, in its respective area. 12. This treaty shall not hinder either party from seeking lawful revenge. [Ibn Hisham 1/503,504]

The emboldened provisions were broken by the Jewish tribes.

Cool. On this logic, you support the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and the coming strike on Iran.
They have all been warned repeatedly by many countries, including the UN, repeatedly, not to break faith with them but they did so Uncle Sam (peace b upon him) and his merry band of allies have done/will do the necessary.
Just following Mohammed's example.
Verily.

So that's how the Jews lived in peace under Islam?

freediver wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 1:46pm:

So that's how the Jews lived in peace under Islam?

No. More like the way the blacks lived in peace under apartheid. Peace for non-muslim under islam is dhimmitude.

freediver wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 1:46pm:

So that's how the Jews lived in peace under Islam?

The Jews of Madina were not living under the Islamic state as such. They were not dhimmis, and they did not have to pay any tax to the Islamic state under the treaty signed. The situation was more like a coalition of states.

If a state breaks a treaty, then it has lost it rights to security under the treaty.

Soren wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 1:44pm:

Cool. On this logic, you support the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and the coming strike on Iran. They have all been warned repeatedly by many countries, including the UN, repeatedly, not to break faith with them but they did so Uncle Sam (peace b upon him) and his merry band of allies have done/will do the necessary. Just following Mohammed's example. Verily.

You are a very illogical person/sockpuppet.

The Iraqi, Afghanistani and Iranian governments did not break any treaty with the US, so the comparison you have drawn bears no weight.

Soren wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 1:55pm:

freediver wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 1:46pm: So that's how the Jews lived in peace under Islam? No. More like the way the blacks lived in peace under apartheid. Peace for non-muslim under islam is dhimmitude.

This is incorrect.

Muslims did not force non-Muslims to relocate like whites did to blacks in Apartheid.

The relocation of a Jewish tribe from Madinah was an exceptional case because the tribe was treated as a state. Individual Jews were able to ask permission to stay in Madina on an individual basis, but their right to live as a state within a state was revoked upon their violations of treaties..

Many Jews asked permission to stay in Madina, and were given this permission. The expulsion was for the tribe as a legal entity as a state within a state. Individual Jews were permitted to remain if they so wished.


Apartheid also restricted employment opportunities according to race. This is not the case in Islam which does not restrict dhimmis from employment except in areas involving state secrecy.

falah wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 2:32pm:

freediver wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 1:46pm: So that's how the Jews lived in peace under Islam? The Jews of Madina were not living under the Islamic state as such. They were not dhimmis, and they did not have to pay any tax to the Islamic state under the treaty signed. The situation was more like a coalition of states. If a state breaks a treaty, then it has lost it rights to security under the treaty.

And the people should be slaughtered?


falah wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 2:35pm:

Soren wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 1:44pm: Cool. On this logic, you support the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and the coming strike on Iran. They have all been warned repeatedly by many countries, including the UN, repeatedly, not to break faith with them but they did so Uncle Sam (peace b upon him) and his merry band of allies have done/will do the necessary. Just following Mohammed's example. Verily. You are a very illogical person/sockpuppet. The Iraqi, Afghanistani and Iranian governments did not break any treaty with the US, so the comparison you have drawn bears no weight.

Osama declared war on the US. Does that count?

Weren't you just explaining that Muslims don't honour treaties anyway?


Quote:

Muslims did not force non-Muslims to relocate like whites did to blacks in Apartheid.

Isn't that your condition for Palestinian Muslims to stop attacking Israel?


Quote:

The expulsion was for the tribe as a legal entity as a state within a state. Individual Jews were permitted to remain if they so wished.

Except of course for the ones that were already slaughtered eh? Is that how it works. You slaughter half of them and tell the other half they can apply for permission to hang around, provided they do as they are told?

Yadda wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 10:02pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:48pm: Yadda, your posts are models of the Christian pamphlet genre. Have you thought of writing them for a living? There's big money in Christian pamphlets these days. Oh wow! Do you really think i could make it big ?

Comfortable maybe, not big.

To make it big you need love.

Google: 1 Corinthians 13.

Love:

love  (lv)
n.
1. A deep, tender, ineffable feeling of affection and solicitude toward a person, such as that arising from kinship, recognition of attractive qualities, or a sense of underlying oneness.
2. A feeling of intense desire and attraction toward a person with whom one is disposed to make a pair; the emotion of sex and romance.
3.
a. Sexual passion.
b. Sexual intercourse.
c. A love affair.
4. An intense emotional attachment, as for a pet or treasured object.
5. A person who is the object of deep or intense affection or attraction; beloved. Often used as a term of endearment.
6. An expression of one's affection: Send him my love.
7.
a. A strong predilection or enthusiasm: a love of language.
b. The object of such an enthusiasm: The outdoors is her greatest love.
8. Love Mythology Eros or Cupid.
9. often Love Christianity Charity.
10. Sports A zero score in tennis.
v. loved, lov·ing, loves
v.tr.
1. To have a deep, tender, ineffable feeling of affection and solicitude toward (a person): We love our parents. I love my friends.
2. To have a feeling of intense desire and attraction toward (a person).
3. To have an intense emotional attachment to: loves his house.
4.
a. To embrace or caress.
b. To have sexual intercourse with.
5. To like or desire enthusiastically: loves swimming.
6. Theology To have charity for.
7. To thrive on; need: The cactus loves hot, dry air.
v.intr.
To experience deep affection or intense desire for another.
Idioms:
for love
Out of compassion; with no thought for a reward: She volunteers at the hospital for love.
for love or money
Under any circumstances. Usually used in negative sentences: I would not do that for love or money.
for the love of
For the sake of; in consideration for: did it all for the love of praise.
in love
1. Deeply or passionately enamored: a young couple in love.
2. Highly or immoderately fond: in love with Japanese painting; in love with the sound of her own voice.
no love lost
No affection; animosity: There's no love lost between them.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Middle English, from Old English lufu; see leubh- in Indo-European roots.]
Synonyms: love, affection, devotion, fondness, infatuation
These nouns denote feelings of warm personal attachment or strong attraction to another person. Love is the most intense: marrying for love.
Affection is a less ardent and more unvarying feeling of tender regard: parental affection.
Devotion is earnest, affectionate dedication and implies selflessness: teachers admired for their devotion to children.
Fondness is strong liking or affection: a fondness for small animals.
Infatuation is foolish or extravagant attraction, often of short duration: lovers blinded to their differences by their mutual infatuation.

freediver wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 4:09pm:

Except of course for the ones that were already slaughtered eh? Is that how it works. You slaughter half of them and tell the other half they can apply for permission to hang around, provided they do as they are told?

Yes, that's it.



"This comprehensive meticulously documented collection of scholarly articles presents indisputable evidence that a readily discernible and uniquely Islamic antisemitism has been expressed continuously since the advent of Islam. The contributors show that the "Koran" itself is a significant source of hostility towards Jews as well as other foundational texts."


Read it ll here:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Legacy-Islamic-Antisemitism-History/dp/1591025540

freediver wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 4:09pm:

falah wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 2:32pm: freediver wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 1:46pm: So that's how the Jews lived in peace under Islam? The Jews of Madina were not living under the Islamic state as such. They were not dhimmis, and they did not have to pay any tax to the Islamic state under the treaty signed. The situation was more like a coalition of states. If a state breaks a treaty, then it has lost it rights to security under the treaty. And the people should be slaughtered?

This is a typical lie of yours Freeliar. No non-combatants were killed.




falah wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 2:35pm:

Soren wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 1:44pm: Cool. On this logic, you support the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and the coming strike on Iran. They have all been warned repeatedly by many countries, including the UN, repeatedly, not to break faith with them but they did so Uncle Sam (peace b upon him) and his merry band of allies have done/will do the necessary. Just following Mohammed's example. Verily. You are a very illogical person/sockpuppet. The Iraqi, Afghanistani and Iranian governments did not break any treaty with the US, so the comparison you have drawn bears no weight.

Osama declared war on the US. Does that count?[/quote]

If you declared war on the US would that give the US the right to invade Australia?



freediver wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 4:09pm:

Weren't you just explaining that Muslims don't honour treaties anyway?

No Freeliar, if history has shown us anything, it is Christians and Jews who break their treaties.

Just have a read of the history of the Crusades, you will see that the Christians never kept their word.


freediver wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 4:09pm:

Quote: Muslims did not force non-Muslims to relocate like whites did to blacks in Apartheid. Isn't that your condition for Palestinian Muslims to stop attacking Israel?

Freeliar it is Israel which is attacking Muslims, and the whole world except you and the rest of the Jews knows this.



freediver wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 4:09pm:

Quote: The expulsion was for the tribe as a legal entity as a state within a state. Individual Jews were permitted to remain if they so wished. Except of course for the ones that were already slaughtered eh? Is that how it works. You slaughter half of them and tell the other half they can apply for permission to hang around, provided they do as they are told?

No non-combatants were killed.If it were as you suggested why would any of them stay at all? The fact is that quite a few Jews were so impressed by the mercy and generosity of the Muslims that that they voluntarily converted to Islam.

One of these Jews married Prophet Muhammed (God's peace & blessing upun him) after being given the option of staying or exile. If she felt that the Jews had been harshly treated would she likely have have  stayed in Madina, converted to Islam, married the leader of the Muslims, and become a great scholar of the Islamic religion?

Quote:

9. Should any disagreement arise between the signatories to this treaty, then God, the All-High and His Messenger shall settle the dispute.

Falah, can you explain how such an agreement can work between people of two different religions?


Quote:

If you declared war on the US would that give the US the right to invade Australia?

If I followed through on it and the Australian government didn't fix the problem, then yes. Given that Afghanistan didn't even have a recognised government at the time it makes the comparison a bit silly.


Quote:

No Freeliar, if history has shown us anything, it is Christians and Jews who break their treaties.

No Falah, that's only your bias coming through. Don't you think it is a bit silly for you to just finish explaining why Muslims should not honour peace treaties then start complaining that only non-Muslims break treaties?


Quote:

Muslims did not force non-Muslims to relocate like whites did to blacks in Apartheid.

Falah, can you explain how this was done differently? Is the only difference that the Muslims had divine authority and the South Africans didn't?


Quote:

The first tribe of Jews were expelled from Madina after molesting a Muslim woman and the mob-killing of a Muslim man openly in the jewish market.

Quote:

Freeliar it is Israel which is attacking Muslims, and the whole world except you and the rest of the Jews knows this.

So why can you not answer the question? Don't your demands of Israel involve non-Muslims being forced to relocate to appease Muslims?


Quote:

No non-combatants were killed.

Were any non-combatants forced off their land?

I notice you did not use the word 'innocent'. Can you explain why? Is this just a way of defining the problem conveniently out of existence? Muhammed's merry horsemen rode in wielding swords slaughtering everyone, and anyone who got in the way of those swords is by definition a 'combatant'?


Quote:

If it were as you suggested why would any of them stay at all?

For the same reason Palestinians are hanging around Israel. Why are you so blind to your own double standards?

freediver wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 10:00pm:

Quote: 9. Should any disagreement arise between the signatories to this treaty, then God, the All-High and His Messenger shall settle the dispute. Falah, can you explain how such an agreement can work between people of two different religions?

Easy. He'd make one side strong enough to defeat the other in battle.

Common sense, innit.

Falah, can you please tell us about the Islamic principles of Hudna and the treaty of Hudaibiya?

freediver wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 9:02am:

Falah, can you please tell us about the Islamic principles of Hudna and the treaty of Hudaibiya?

Freeliar/Yadda (whoever you are at the moment), I have already explained that the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah was violated by the pagan side not the Muslim side.

The pagans committed a sensless massacre which violated the terms of the treaty. Should Muslims be bound by a treaty that the other side violates?

Even after they pagans had violated the treaty, Muslims still left the door open topeace by offering the pagans an opportunity to pay compensation to the victims' families or terminate their alliance with the agressor parties. The pagans refused, so the Muslims were left without a choice but to consider the treaty null and void when it had cleartly been vioalted by the pagans..

So what is Hudna?

freediver wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 11:06am:

So what is Hudna?

"Hudna" literally means something like "armistice agreement".

In Arabic there are other words for "treaty". For example, the Quran uses the word "meethaaq" which means "treaty".

OK, so that is the literal translation of the word. What about the Islamic concept of it? Is it true that Islam only sees such treaties as temporary?

freediver wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 11:28am:

OK, so that is the literal translation of the word. What about the Islamic concept of it? Is it true that Islam only sees such treaties as temporary?

Freeliar, treaties generally are temporary, in that parties are free to withdraw from them at any time.

States are usually free to pull out of treaties any time they wish.

Freeliar it seems that your idea of "treaty" is not what is understood by rest of the world.


Quote:

...Treaties are not necessarily permanently binding upon the signatory parties. As obligations in international law are traditionally viewed as arising only from the consent of states, many treaties expressly allow a state to withdraw as long as it follows certain procedures of notification. Many treaties expressly forbid withdrawal. Other treaties are silent on the issue, and so if a state attempts withdrawal through its own unilateral denunciation of the treaty, a determination must be made regarding whether permitting withdrawal is contrary to the original intent of the parties or to the nature of the treaty... ...If a state party's withdrawal is successful, its obligations under that treaty are considered terminated, and withdrawal by one party from a bilateral treaty of course terminates the treaty... ...Treaties sometimes include provisions for self-termination, meaning that the treaty is automatically terminated if certain defined conditions are met. Some treaties are intended by the parties to be only temporarily binding and are set to expire on a given date. Other treaties may self-terminate if the treaty is meant to exist only under certain conditions... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty

Canada to withdraw from Kyoto Protocol
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16151310

Falah, I am asking you what Islam's take on the principle is.

Falah, you appear to be attempting to justify Islam's position on this while at the same time being too ashamed to actually admit what it is.

Is that correct?

Perhaps you would feel better about it if you could give an example of a peace treaty that Muhammed entered into that he did not later break?

freediver wrote on May 28^th, 2012 at 8:10am:

Perhaps you would feel better about it if you could give an example of a peace treaty that Muhammed entered into that he did not later break?

How about you give me an example of a treaty that he did break?

falah wrote on May 28^th, 2012 at 12:06pm:

freediver wrote on May 28th, 2012 at 8:10am: Perhaps you would feel better about it if you could give an example of a peace treaty that Muhammed entered into that he did not later break? How about you give me an example of a treaty that he did break?

But, in fact, Muhammad was the first to violate the Treaty of Hudaibiya.  Even the Qur’an acknowledges this, which means any knowledgeable Muslim must as well.

The terms of the treaty specified that any Muslim who flees Mecca for Medina (where Muhammad resided) must be returned.  But when a group of Muslims did exactly that a few weeks after the treaty signing, Muhammad did not return all of them, but kept the women.  A verse from Allah arrived conveniently to justify his decision (60:10).

Today’s Muslims have only one answer for this: Allah gave Muhammad His personal permission to break the treaty.  It is an obvious double standard, but one that they are comfortable with, since Muslims believe their religion makes them superior.  (It remains unclear as to why Allah had Muhammad sign on to terms that were intended to be violated).

Eschewing technicalities at this point, the apologists then begin to talk of the seriousness of violations, claiming that the killing of those tribe members allied with the Muslims constituted a graver offense.  They are correct, of course, but there is yet another piece to the story that drives home the double standard all the more:

As it turns out, Muslims were murdering Meccans after the treaty signing and prior to the revenge killings between the allied tribes!

Bukhari 50:891 tells of a man named Abu Basir who embraced Islam and then killed a Meccan.  Muhammad sends the man to live on the coast, where he forms a group of seventy Muslims who support themselves by attacking Meccan caravans.  According to the Hadith, he and the other Muslims “killed them and took their property.”  Muir words it as follows, “They waylaid every caravan from Mecca (for since the truce, traffic with Syria had again sprung up) and spared the life of no one.”

Attacking and killing Meccans was an obvious violation of the treaty of Hudaibiya, but the victims did not want war with Muhammad and thus did not march against him.  Yet, Muhammad jumped on the first excuse to attack the Meccans, even though they were not threatening him.  His adversaries wanted peace, but he wanted power.  Needless to say, they had little choice but to surrender to him without a fight.

The dual ethics of Islam are ingrained in the faith, including the disparate treatment of unbelievers.  It should be no surprise that Muhammad held others to standards by which he was personally unwilling to abide.  In this case, he was the first to violate the treaty of Hudaibiya.  Thus did he establish an example for his followers: a promise to non-Muslims is not obligatory for the believer.  As Abu Bakr, himself a military leader, put it:

"If I take an oath to do something and later on I find something else better than the first one, then I do what is better and make expiation for my oath." (Bukhari 78:618)
Muhammad no doubt would have agreed:


"The Prophet said: 'War is deceit'." (Bukhari 52:269)

falah wrote on May 28^th, 2012 at 12:06pm:

freediver wrote on May 28th, 2012 at 8:10am: Perhaps you would feel better about it if you could give an example of a peace treaty that Muhammed entered into that he did not later break? How about you give me an example of a treaty that he did break?

All of the ones I have heard about so far. I realise he always blamed the Jews, of course. Do I need to rephrase the question for you to be able to answer it, or would it be a pointless exercise anyway?

Soren, thanks for the details. They paint a very different picture to what Falah has been putting forward. Falah, if this is all in the Koran and Hadiths then surely you have no reason to cover them up or misrepresent them? You are not ashamed of them are you?

Perhaps it is time for you to explain the Islamic principle of Hudna, rather than constantly deflecting.