Fooled you. Different kind of land grabs this time.

Anyway, Sam and I have been fencing about the issues of Trojan arguments and sneaky Greeks lately; I recently posted a blurb about CAIR-Canada's er..."noble" attempt to silence an ex-terrorist speaking about the politics of hate, and since then Sam and I have been firing half-hearted shots across each other's bows as if attempting to win the argument through sheer pithiness. (I note that, as of this post, I am in the lead. ;) )

At any rate; our issue isn't really about whether such attitudes exist in the islamic world. No - rather, it's about whether such attitudes are codified in islamic law, and society. And it has been - it is - my contention that they are, indeed, and that the cooler heads and clearer hearts of Samwise et al. (Zak may take a bow) are perhaps rarer than what is considered to be the more "radical" or "extremist" view. I think it was Seneca (?) who said that the depravity of a society may be judged by the number of laws it has - and to which I add, the way in which its laws are designed to operate:

Jan. 25, 2007
Bethlehem Christians fear neighbors

By KHALED ABU TOAMEH

BETHLEHEM

A number of Christian families have finally decided to break their silence and talk openly about what they describe as Muslim persecution of the Christian minority in this city.

The move comes as a result of increased attacks on Christians by Muslims over the past few months. The families said they wrote letters to Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, the Vatican, Church leaders and European governments complaining about the attacks, but their appeals have fallen on deaf ears.

According to the families, many Christians have long been afraid to complain in public about the campaign of "intimidation" for fear of retaliation by their Muslim neighbors and being branded "collaborators" with Israel.

Ah, that modern rub. You don't like dhimmitude? Well, our laws are self-evidently just - it says so in this book, see? - and so you must clearly be a collaborator.

And you know what happens to them.

And here I thought that all islamic intolerance sprung from the existence of Israel; yet other communities besides Jewish ones must suffer, it seems.

But following an increase in attacks on Christian-owned property in the city over the past few months, some Christians are no longer afraid to talk about the ultra-sensitive issue. And they are talking openly about leaving the city.

"The situation is very dangerous," said Samir Qumsiyeh, owner of the Beit Sahur-based private Al-Mahd (Nativity) TV station. "I believe that 15 years from now there will be no Christians left in Bethlehem. Then you will need a torch to find a Christian here. This is a very sad situation."

Qumsiyeh, one of the few Christians willing to speak about the harsh conditions of their community, has been the subject of numerous death threats. His house was recently attacked with fire-bombs, but no one was hurt.

Qumsiyeh said he has documented more than 160 incidents of attacks on Christians in the area in recent years.

He said a monk was recently roughed up for trying to prevent a group of Muslim men from seizing lands owned by Christians in Beit Sahur. Thieves have targeted the homes of many Christian families and a "land mafia" has succeeded in laying its hands on vast areas of land belonging to Christians, he added.

Of course, it could be argued that such a gang could be of any class, and that their preying on Christians was merely incidental. Of course, Christians already form a minority within Bethlehem - and can anyone honestly imagine the authorities tolerating a Christian gang stealing land from muslim citizens for more than five minutes? No, I thought not. This is what a bimodal standard of law and justice get you: exploitation, not "protection", except perhaps in the racketeering sense.

Fuad and Georgette Lama woke up one morning last September to discover that Muslims from a nearby village had fenced off their family's six-dunam plot in the Karkafa suburb south of Bethlehem. "A lawyer and an official with the Palestinian Authority just came and took our land," said 69-year-old Georgette Lama.

The couple was later approached by senior PA security officers who offered to help them kick out the intruders from the land. "We paid them $1,000 so they could help us regain our land," she said, almost in tears. "Instead of giving us back our land, they simply decided to keep it for themselves. They even destroyed all the olive trees and divided the land into small plots, apparently so that they could offer each for sale." When her 72-year-old husband, Fuad, went to the land to ask the intruders to leave, he was severely beaten and threatened with guns.

Again: a bimodal standard of justice. And yet educated people - even on this very forum - defend sharia and mock the existence of dhimmitude. But in fact, such a cavalier attitude is easy to maintain - so long as it's not your own head in the dock.

"My husband is after heart surgery and they still beat him," Georgette Lama said. "These people have no heart. We're afraid to go to our land because they will shoot at us. Ever since the beating, my husband is in a state of trauma and has difficulties talking."

The Lamas have since knocked on the doors of scores of PA officials in Bethlehem seeking their intervention, but to no avail. At one stage, they sent a letter to Abbas, who promised to launch an investigation.

"We heard that President Mahmoud Abbas is taking our case very seriously," said Georgette Lama. "But until now he hasn't done anything to help us get our land back. We are very concerned because we're not the only ones suffering from this phenomenon. Most Christians are afraid to speak, but I don't care because we have nothing more to lose."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1167467807655&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

There is no equity in a system that provides "protection" through institutionalized discrimination; where rights spring not from equality before a common law, but out of the sufferance of their superiors. There is little doubt as to why the complaints of Christians in muslim Bethlehem are not being taken seriously (although I'm sure Mahmoud is going to get right on that :rolleyes: ); the twin codices of sharia and dhimmitude dictate that no one is required to do so.

Exploitation inevitably results.

Read it all.

Best,

Geoff

So how are the Christians treated by Israelis in the West Bank?

PS There are Christians in Palestine!?!?!?!?


A similar pattern can be discerned inside Israel too, where Christians have come to comprise an ever-smaller proportion of Palestinians with Israeli citizenship. In 1948 they were nearly a quarter of that minority (itself 20 per cent of the total Israeli population), and today they are a mere 10 percent. Most are located in Nazareth and nearby villages in the Galilee.

Where did they go?:confused:

Here is how the Jerusalem Post, for example, characterized the fate of the Holy Land's non-Muslims in a Christmas editorial: "Muslim intolerance toward Christians and Jews is cut from exactly the same cloth. It is the same jihad." The Post concluded by arguing that only by confronting the jihadis would "the plight of persecuted Christians – and of the persecuted Jewish state – be ameliorated."

Similar sentiments were recently aired in an article by Aaron Klein of WorldNetDaily republished on Ynet, Israel's most popular website, that preposterously characterized a procession of families through Nazareth on Eid al-Adha, the most important Muslim festival, as a show of strength by militant Islam designed to intimidate local Christians.

Islam's green flags were "brandished," according to Klein, whose reporting transformed a local troupe of Scouts and their marching band into "Young Muslim men in battle gear" "beating drums." Nazareth's youngsters, meanwhile, were apparently the next generation of Qassam rocket engineers: "Muslim children launched firecrackers into the sky, occasionally misfiring, with the small explosives landing dangerously close to the crowds."

Such sensationalist misrepresentations of Palestinian life are now a staple of the local and American media. Support for Hamas, for example, is presented as proof of jihadism run amok in Palestinian society rather than as evidence of despair at Fatah's corruption and collaboration with Israel and ordinary Palestinians' determination to find leaders prepared to counter Israel's terminal cynicism with proper resistance.

There is only one problem in selling this image to the West: the minority of Christian Palestinians who have happily lived under Muslim rule in the Holy Land for centuries. Today, in a way quite infuriating to Israel, these Christians confuse the picture by continuing to take a leading role in defining Palestinian nationalism and resistance to Israel's occupation. They prefer to side with the Muslim "fanatics" than with Israel, the Middle East's only outpost of Judeo-Christian "civilization."

The presence of Palestinian Christians reminds us that the supposed "clash of civilizations" in the Holy Land is not really a war of religions but a clash of nationalisms, between the natives and European colonial settlers.

Inside Israel, for example, Christians have been the backbone of the Communist party, the only non-Zionist party Israel allowed for several decades. Many of the Palestinian artists and intellectuals who are most critical of Israel are Christians, including the late novelist Emile Habibi; the writer Anton Shammas and film-makers Elia Suleiman and Hany Abu Assad (all now living in exile); and the journalist Antoine Shalhat (who, for reasons unknown, has been placed under a loose house arrest, unable to leave Israel).
The most notorious Palestinian nationalist politician inside Israel is Azmi Bishara, yet another Christian, who has been put on trial and is regularly abused by his colleagues in the Knesset.

Similarly, Christians have been at the core of the wider secular Palestinian national movement, helping to define its struggle. They range from exiled professors such as the late Edward Said to human rights activists in the occupied territories such as Raja Shehadeh. The founders of the most militant wings of the national movement, the Democratic and Popular Fronts for the Liberation of Palestine, were Nayif Hawatmeh and George Habash, both Christians.

This intimate involvement of Palestinian Christians in the Palestinian national struggle is one of the reasons why Israel has been so keen to find ways to encourage their departure – and then blame it on intimidation by, and violence from, Muslims.


More:
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/cook.php?articleid=10297

when will day come and all the middle east keeps to middle east?

as for christians in West Bank...none blew themselves up...so they must be treated well...zionism is similar to christianity anyways...

yawn...zionists...terrorists...islamofascits...Goo d Grace go away evil ghosts...


p.s. geoffP is ur new follower/bf? what happened to outlandish?

she's mine.

....Sam and I have been....sneaky....speaking about.....then Sam and I have been firing half-hearted shots across each other's bows as if attempting to win the argument through sheer pithiness.

when will day come and all the middle east keeps to middle east?

as for christians in West Bank...none blew themselves up...so they must be treated well...zionism is similar to christianity anyways...

yawn...zionists...terrorists...islamofascits...Goo d Grace go away evil ghosts...


Perhaps not blowing themselves up, but supporting those who do.


Dr. Attallah Hanna Sebastieh is the Archbishop of the Roman Orthodox Church in Jerusalem. Addressing a packed crowd at the Zayed Centre for Coordination and Follow-Up in the capital, Father Dr Attallah Hanna, official spokesman of the Orthodox Church in Jerusalem and the Holy Land, said last night he supported martyrdom by Palestinian men and women to fight for their just rights.

and...

in Lebanon in the 1980s, of those suicide attackers, only eight were Islamic fundamentalists. Twenty-seven were Communists and Socialists. Three were Christians.

Where did they go?:confused:


were all people go...http://www.novaspace.com/XMAS/PIX/Heavens.jpeg
...anyways they went to Lebanon from Israel...

were all people go...[

Not ALL people...
http://www.thewitness.org/archive/mayjune2003/ateek.html

Besides the basic political injustice and the oppressiveness of the occupation, there are four major areas that constitute the breeding ground for suicide bombers. To begin with, many young men have become permanently unemployed.

Moreover, it is the young men more than others who are humiliated, harassed and provoked by the Israeli soldiers.

Furthermore, there is hardly any Palestinian family in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip that has not experienced some kind of pain or injury. Many families have lost their loved ones. Almost every aspect of Palestinian life is controlled by the Israeli army and many people have lost the ability to dream of a better future or envisage a better life.

There is another group of young Palestinian men and women that must be mentioned. Many of these have been arrested and tortured in Israeli prisons and "concentration" camps. In fact, Israeli prisons have become the "factories" for creating and "manufacturing" collaborators. Young men are detained for indefinite periods of time and are pressured into becoming spies and collaborators. They are simply trapped and some of them do not know how to shake it off. This phenomenon causes some of them to exist in constant self-contempt and scorn for having betrayed their own people. They are ready to become suicide bombers in order to purify and redeem themselves and express their utmost loyalty and patriotism for their country and people.

For these young people, daily life has become an experience of death. Indeed, many of them feel that Israel has practically pronounced a death sentence on them. They feel they have no options and very little to lose. Consequently, they are willing to give themselves up for the cause of God and the homeland (watan), believing that with God there is so much to gain.

From the perspective of those who believe in and carry out these suicide operations, there is a simple and plain logic. As Israeli soldiers shell and kill Palestinians indiscriminately, Palestinian suicide bombers strap themselves with explosives and kill Israelis indiscriminately.

An interesting aside:
This story of the suicidal killing of thousands of men and women, most of them no doubt innocent, by the blinded and humiliated Samson, is taught approvingly to present-day Israeli children. The protagonist is conventionally referred to as "Samson the Hero" (Shimshon Haggibor).
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=7417

Not ALL people...
http://www.thewitness.org/archive/mayjune2003/ateek.html



An interesting aside:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=7417

there is no heaven...there is no hell...they just go back to life as another human being. And Samson...bless his hair...strength did he have...

Where did they go?:confused:

An interesting opinion piece; yet, an opinion piece.

An interesting opinion piece; yet, an opinion piece.

I would think the "opinion" of educated Palestinian Christians as reflected by this:

Inside Israel, for example, Christians have been the backbone of the Communist party, the only non-Zionist party Israel allowed for several decades. Many of the Palestinian artists and intellectuals who are most critical of Israel are Christians, including the late novelist Emile Habibi; the writer Anton Shammas and film-makers Elia Suleiman and Hany Abu Assad (all now living in exile); and the journalist Antoine Shalhat (who, for reasons unknown, has been placed under a loose house arrest, unable to leave Israel).

The most notorious Palestinian nationalist politician inside Israel is Azmi Bishara, yet another Christian, who has been put on trial and is regularly abused by his colleagues in the Knesset.

Similarly, Christians have been at the core of the wider secular Palestinian national movement, helping to define its struggle. They range from exiled professors such as the late Edward Said to human rights activists in the occupied territories such as Raja Shehadeh. The founders of the most militant wings of the national movement, the Democratic and Popular Fronts for the Liberation of Palestine, were Nayif Hawatmeh and George Habash, both Christians.

is not insignificant to your OP, especially when you use a piece by KHALED ABU TOAMEH who is a mouth piece for right-wing zionists and trotted out as frequently as Walid Shoebat.:rolleyes:

Jonathan Cook too is a freelance British journalist who stays in Israeli Arab Nazareth and is as "on the spot" as Toameh.

More "opinions"
http://www.forward.com/articles/fight-erupts-in-dc-over-plight-of-palestinian-chri/

For example, they challenged the bill’s claims that “Palestinian Christians are forced to follow Islamic law in public or face arrest by Palestinian Authority police”; that Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian Authority’s late president, and his supporters “effectively cleansed the [P.A.’s] bureaucracy of Christians”; that “Palestinian Christians are denied jobs in state-run organizations”; that “Palestinian Christians are accused of being Israeli and American collaborators and are interrogated and imprisoned without reason”; that the Palestinian police do not respond to harassment complaints made by Palestinian Christians, and that the unpunished violence toward Christians “has led to a significant increase in pervasive sexual harassment and rape.”

Daphne Tsimhoni, a professor at the Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa and a leading scholar on Christian minorities in the Middle East, told the Forward that almost all the bill’s assertions are either exaggerations, misrepresentations or sheer fabrications.

The aides to McCaul and Crowley told fellow congressional staffers that their main source of information was several reports and articles by Justus Reid Weiner, an Israeli lawyer. Weiner works for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, a right-of-center think-tank. Dore Gold, who was a political adviser to former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and previously served as Israel’s permanent representative to the United Nations, directs the center.

Weiner has written extensively in the past about human rights violations of Christians in the West Bank, faulting the Palestinian society and the Palestinian government for their plight. Some scholars, including Tsimhoni, Palestinian Christians and American Christian groups, have challenged his research. Congressional aides closely familiar with the legislation said that Weiner helped draft the bill. Weiner confirmed to the Forward that he had “seen a draft [of the bill] at one point or another.”

Palestinian Christians and pro-Palestinian activists say that although there may have been isolated incidents of harassment of Palestinian Christians by Palestinian Muslims, and although Palestinian Christians are concerned by the rise to power of militant Islamists in the West Bank, the attempt to portray these phenomena as a systematic pattern of persecution of Christians by the P.A. is absurd.

“This, to me, is like trying to drown a fish in water,” said Afif Safieh, who heads the Palestine Liberation Organization’s mission to Washington. Safieh, a Roman Catholic with scores of relatives in the West Bank, said that the incidents of which he is aware are ones that can be attributed to “lawlessness from which the entire population suffers.” He added that the PLO always has been “extremely open-minded and fair toward the Christian community.”

Christians, he said, are overrepresented in the Palestinian political system and in the P.A.’s bureaucracy. He added that, despite his political differences with the ruling militant Hamas organization, he must admit that the Islamist movement has not taken any steps to discriminate against Christians and has not imposed Islamic law.

“Hamas has not annoyed or disturbed Palestinian Christians,” he said.

More "opinions"
http://www.forward.com/articles/fight-erupts-in-dc-over-plight-of-palestinian-chri/

are you capable of your own opinions? or you can only quote from google?

Palestinian Christians and pro-Palestinian activists say that although there may have been isolated incidents of harassment of Palestinian Christians by Palestinian Muslims, and although Palestinian Christians are concerned by the rise to power of militant Islamists in the West Bank, the attempt to portray these phenomena as a systematic pattern of persecution of Christians by the P.A. is absurd.

But, of course, it's not just the PA: it's a societal thing, a veritable "tragedy of the commons" where muslims can exploit local Christians at will - because, of course, Christians (to say nothing of Jews) are second-class citizens ("dhimmis") at best. To whom do they have recourse? They are kufr.

And, frankly, relying on a PA spokesman...well.

“This, to me, is like trying to drown a fish in water,” said Afif Safieh, who heads the Palestine Liberation Organization’s mission to Washington. Safieh, a Roman Catholic with scores of relatives in the West Bank, said that the incidents of which he is aware are ones that can be attributed to “lawlessness from which the entire population suffers.” He added that the PLO always has been “extremely open-minded and fair toward the Christian community.”

Bizarre comparisons aside, I can certainly imagine that the present-day PLO would take that position. But it is not merely that the legal system considers non-muslims as lesser beings, but that the society itself possesses the same opinion - hence, the aggression. There is no real equality, but merely some arcane and much-interpreted mumbo-jumbo basing human rights on an utterly arbitrary religious observance. And, too, the first thing on Hamas' agenda is - by their own admission - increased sharia, whatever the PA or PLO might say.

Christians, he said, are overrepresented in the Palestinian political system and in the P.A.’s bureaucracy. He added that, despite his political differences with the ruling militant Hamas organization, he must admit that the Islamist movement has not taken any steps to discriminate against Christians and has not imposed Islamic law.

“Hamas has not annoyed or disturbed Palestinian Christians,” he said.

Again: they seek to impose sharia. And there are clearly cases where discrimination indeed does occur - the post at the start of the thread actually indicates abuses of authority by the PA. So where does this leave Safieh? "Christians are overrepresented in the Palestinian political system and in the P.A."? On what grounds, and under what relevance? It's already been shown that PA officers abuse their authority against religious minorities; Safieh wishes us to believe that them damn dirty kufr riddle his organization?

Please.

Regards,

Geoff

are you capable of your own opinions? or you can only quote from google?

Silly me, I thought the people most affected had a right to an opinion as much as I do.:rolleyes:

But, of course, it's not just the PA: it's a societal thing, a veritable "tragedy of the commons" where muslims can exploit local Christians at will - because, of course, Christians (to say nothing of Jews) are second-class citizens ("dhimmis") at best. To whom do they have recourse? They are kufr.

And, frankly, relying on a PA spokesman...well.



Bizarre comparisons aside, I can certainly imagine that the present-day PLO would take that position. But it is not merely that the legal system considers non-muslims as lesser beings, but that the society itself possesses the same opinion - hence, the aggression. There is no real equality, but merely some arcane and much-interpreted mumbo-jumbo basing human rights on an utterly arbitrary religious observance. And, too, the first thing on Hamas' agenda is - by their own admission - increased sharia, whatever the PA or PLO might say.



Again: they seek to impose sharia. And there are clearly cases where discrimination indeed does occur - the post at the start of the thread actually indicates abuses of authority by the PA. So where does this leave Safieh? "Christians are overrepresented in the Palestinian political system and in the P.A."? On what grounds, and under what relevance? It's already been shown that PA officers abuse their authority against religious minorities; Safieh wishes us to believe that them damn dirty kufr riddle his organization?

Please.

Regards,

Geoff


And of course, the opinions of a right-wing Israeli Arab obviously are much more relevant than those of Palestinian Christians.

are you capable of your own opinions? or you can only quote from google?

Sam is a propagandist ...giving out her/his own opinion could be detrimental to her/his job as a propagandist! If she/he continues to provide googled, bullshit opinions of others, then she/he is completely free of blame or fault. See? And she/he can go on dishing out propaganda for the people who pay her/him to do.

Baron Max

Sam is a propagandist ...giving out her/his own opinion could be detrimental to her/his job as a propagandist! If she/he continues to provide googled, bullshit opinions of others, then she/he is completely free of blame or fault. See? And she/he can go on dishing out propaganda for the people who pay her/him to do.

Baron Max

Bet you run around in circles all day with your opinionless self (http://www.bu.edu/favoritepoem/poems/dickinson/nobody.html).

More irrelevant "opinions"

Report by Palestinian Christians urges sanctions against Israel -30/03/05

Palestinian Christians have have called for economic sanctions against Israel similar to those imposed against South Africa during the apartheid regime, saying that the churches' other options for ending Israel's occupation have been 'exhausted'.

The call comes from a Palestinian Christian peace advocacy organization which had released a report in response to recent divestment options being adopted by American and European Christian organizations from companies profiting from Israel's military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, including East Jerusalem.

Sabeel, based in Jerusalem and with support groups in the U.S., Canada, and many European countries, advocates ending occupation through nonviolent means and based on international law and existing United Nations resolutions.

...It quotes Israeli human rights lawyer Shamai Leibovitz who states, "As an Israeli thoroughly familiar with Israeli politics, I believe that selective economic pressure is the most effective way to end the brutal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, and bring peace and security to Israelis and Palestinian."

In a March 16 article appearing in "The Nation" magazine, Leibovitz wrote, "For decades the Israeli army, equipped with US arms and technology, has killed, maimed, beaten and tortured tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians. Clearly, America could have put an end to this."


http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/content/news_syndication/article_050330israel.shtml

Bet you run around in circles all day with your opinionless self.

No, Sam, I have my opinions about lots of things, but I'm experienced enough to know that I'm not fully knowledgeable about all of those issues. But unlike some people that I know, I try not to spout them all the time, or to force them onto others.

How's your job as a propagandist doin' these days? I've noticed that you've slowed down some in posting all those foolish links. Are your employers becoming worried about your methods and talents? :D

Baron Max

More irrelevant "opinions"

Everyone has opinions, Sam ........why do you feel qualified to make judgements about which opinions are "relevant" and which are not? Don't you think that just posting those that you feel are "relevant" tell us all a lot about you and your own opinions/thoughts on the subject?

Baron Max

And of course, the opinions of a right-wing Israeli Arab obviously are much more relevant than those of Palestinian Christians.

The question is rather whether one ought to accept the word of the PA and the PLO in the face of other testimony. Safieh represents his organization; he is not some disinterested individual a-walking down the street. Dumping him (and Toameh) into some partisan category to suit your argument does not do it justice.

Best,

Geoff

In a March 16 article appearing in "The Nation" magazine, Leibovitz wrote, "For decades the Israeli army, equipped with US arms and technology, has killed, maimed, beaten and tortured tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians. Clearly, America could have put an end to this."

What a shame Yasser did not accept Oslo. He, too - first and foremost, frankly - could have put an end to this. He did not.

Best,

Geoff

No, Sam, I have my opinions about lots of things, but I'm experienced enough to know that I'm not fully knowledgeable about all of those issues. But unlike some people that I know, I try not to spout them all the time, or to force them onto others.

How's your job as a propagandist doin' these days? I've noticed that you've slowed down some in posting all those foolish links. Are your employers becoming worried about your methods and talents? :D

Baron Max

Miss me huh?:D

Working on the bread and butter these days, gonna get busier soon, so you'll see less of me.

What a shame Yasser did not accept Oslo. He, too - first and foremost, frankly - could have put an end to this. He did not.

Best,

Geoff

Yeah whatta shame, all those greedy conniving Palestinians. Never learn, do they?

Rather one in particular - Yasser - didn't. Then again, it's probably easier just to blame America for it. You know, since they're secretly controlling Yassir Arafat's mind with concentrated alpha waves. Don't laugh. I saw it on al-Manar! It's true!

I understand Raiza is still rolling in dough from her husband's - er..."services" in the name of the Palestinian people. Although I did get an email from her the other day asking for some help getting her cash out of a bank in Geneva. Apparently she's totally cut off from a bank account rivalling Fort Knox's reserves. And all I have to do is provide my bank details and I'm cut for a sweet 5% of that easy EU green. Sweet!

The remainder of their politicians and leaders seem to have been mired in a 7th century mindset that prevented co-operation vis ze evil Joos, while relegating their populations to the role of warhead delivery and/or AK47 spear-carrier. Kinda late for a paradigm shift, I agree, but there it is. Whoulda thunk it, with so many other ME nations being veritable paragons of believer-kufr co-operation?

Best,

Geoff

Yeah whatta shame, all those greedy conniving Palestinians. Never learn, do they?

Interesting aside, Sam. So ....how many wealthy Palestinians are there in the Middle East, Sam? And where did they get their money? You have the answers for most questions, how 'bout those?

Or won't your employers pay you to do that kind of research? ...for fear that it will undemine your position as a great propagandist?

Baron Max

Rather one in particular - Yasser - didn't. Then again, it's probably easier just to blame America for it. You know, since they're secretly controlling Yassir Arafat's mind with concentrated alpha waves. Don't laugh. I saw it on al-Manar! It's true!

I understand Raiza is still rolling in dough from her husband's - er..."services" in the name of the Palestinian people. Although I did get an email from her the other day asking for some help getting her cash out of a bank in Geneva. Apparently she's totally cut off from a bank account rivalling Fort Knox's reserves. And all I have to do is provide my bank details and I'm cut for a sweet 5% of that easy EU green. Sweet!

The remainder of their politicians and leaders seem to have been mired in a 7th century mindset that prevented co-operation vis ze evil Joos, while relegating their populations to the role of warhead delivery and/or AK47 spear-carrier. Kinda late for a paradigm shift, I agree, but there it is. Whoulda thunk it, with so many other ME nations being veritable paragons of believer-kufr co-operation?

Best,

Geoff

Yes all those greedy Palestinian politicians. They must breed an especially virulent variety there. Getting paid off by er, those umm, ahh, yes! those Islamic terrorists! Especially the PA, created in 1994!

The EU and the US, rather. Yassir got rich. I suppose that's the benchmark for success in revitalising Palestine, somehow.

Although there would be those who were greedy and those who were blind. Or are you proposing, rather, that the violence/dhimmitude against Jewish Palestinians was motivated at a more societal level? And here I'm offering you corrupt politicians on a stick! ;)

Best,

Geoff

The EU and the US, rather. Yassir got rich. I suppose that's the benchmark for success in revitalising Palestine, somehow.

Although there would be those who were greedy and those who were blind. Or are you proposing, rather, that the violence/dhimmitude against Jewish Palestinians was motivated at a more societal level? And here I'm offering you corrupt politicians on a stick! ;)

Best,

Geoff

More confabulations.

Observation:

1. Before Israel was formed, Palestinian Christians formed 10% of the population. After the formation of Israel, the proportion of Palestinian Christians dropped until today when it is a bare 2% of the population in Palestine.

2. When Israel was first formed, Christians formed 20% of the population of Israeli Arabs. Today they are around 10%.

Conclusion: The Palestinian Christians are suffering/escaping due to Islam.

:rolleyes:

Still more irrelevant opinions:

http://www.openbethlehem.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=113&Itemid=17


This survey was commissioned by Open Bethlehem, an international PR campaign for Bethlehem, and covered more than 1000 respondents in Bethlehem, Beit Sahour and Beit Jala. The survey questions covered a variety of aspects that relate to the experiences and attitudes of the residents of the three cities.

The key findings of the survey were as follows:

- 43.1% are pessimistic in different degrees about the future of the city of Bethlehem.
- 20.1% of the Christians say that many of their relatives have emigrated recently, as against 5.4% Muslims responding to the same question.
- 47.8% of all respondents have considered emigrating.
- 12.7% are in the process of emigrating, 15.7% of Christians and 8.3% of Muslims.
- 76.4% believe that the main cause of the emigration of 400 Christian families in the past few years is due to the Israeli aggression and occupation, whereas 3.1% only believe that it is due to the rise of Islamic movements.
- 66% of the Christians believe that Israel deals with the Christian Heritage of Bethlehem with brutality or indifference.
- 73.3% of Christians believe that the Palestinian National Authority deals with the Christian Heritage of Bethlehem with respect.
- 82.5% think that the UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) should list Bethlehem as an International Cultural Heritage Site.
- 74.4% believe that most people around the world must have heard about Bethlehem.
- 75.7% believe that most people around the world would want to visit Bethlehem
- 34.9% believe that the most important factor that prevents tourists from visiting Bethlehem is fear for their own safety, and 28.4% believe that it is fear of general violence that might erupt in the area.
- 81.3% believe in different degrees that Bethlehem is a safe place for tourists.
- 86.1% believe that the churches should make a greater effort to help Bethlehem.
- 52.1% believe that most people around the world know little about the reality of the situation in Bethlehem, whereas 22.6% believe that most of them know nothing about Bethlehem.

Sam, I see your propaganda campaigns are increasing again. Does that mean that your employers have decided that you should continue? Or did they give up a big raise in salary to continue to maintain all of those weblinks of bullshit opinions?

I must say, Sam, ...really, ...you're a damned good propagandist.

What's interesting to me, however, is how seemingly interested you are in Israeli-Palestinian issues, yet completely ignore the human rights problems and poverty, and lack of quality education and living conditions in your own nation of India. How can you do that and still hold your head up?

Baron Max

Relevant or irrelevant?
http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/content/news_syndication/article_061220bethlehem.shtml

Americans not sure where Bethlehem is, survey shows -20/12/06

Though their government plays a determinative role in the region, most Americans are not too sure about where Bethlehem is and who lives there. Many believe that is an Israeli town inhabited by a mixture of Jews and Muslims, a pre-Christmas survey of US perceptions of the city has shown - reports Independent Catholic News.

Only 15 per cent of people in the United States realise that it is a Palestinian city with a mixed Christian-Muslim community, lying in the occupied West Bank territory.

The nationwide USA survey, carried out by top political pollsters Zogby International, canvassed 15,000 American respondents. The poll was commissioned by the campaign organisation Open Bethlehem to coincide with a survey carried out in Bethlehem itself * canvassing 1,000 respondents from the three urban centres of Bethlehem, where the population splits almost equally between Muslims and Christians.

The surveys have put the spotlight on the plight of the town, which has been fast losing its indigenous Christian population since the construction of the Israeli wall plunged Bethlehem into economic crisis.

While the Christians of Bethlehem overwhelmingly (78%) blame the exodus of Christians from the town on Israel's blockade, Americans are more likely (45.9%) to blame it on Islamic politics and are reluctant (7.4%) to blame Israel.

And while four out of ten Americans believe that the wall exists for Israel's security, more than nine out of ten Bethlehemites believe it is part of a plan by Israel to confiscate Palestinian land.

The Zogby survey shows strong support for the town in the US, where 65.5% of the population want the United Nations to list it as a world heritage site. Americans are also strongly in favour (80.6%) of Bethlehem retaining a strong Christian presence.

Americans are also ambivalent about the Israeli wall, with 31.5% in favour of it, with another 31.6% opposed. But more than two-thirds of them believe Bethlehem is unsafe to visit, while 80% of Bethlehemites consider their town safe for visitors.

While the US survey showed that Americans are sceptical about Muslims and Christians living contentedly alongside each other - only 17% thought they lived together in peaceful coexistence *- the Palestinian survey showed they do: around 90% of Christians said they had Muslim friends, and vice-versa.

Sam, I see your propaganda campaigns are increasing again. Does that mean that your employers have decided that you should continue? Or did they give up a big raise in salary to continue to maintain all of those weblinks of bullshit opinions?

I must say, Sam, ...really, ...you're a damned good propagandist.

What's interesting to me, however, is how seemingly interested you are in Israeli-Palestinian issues, yet completely ignore the human rights problems and poverty, and lack of quality education and living conditions in your own nation of India. How can you do that and still hold your head up?

Baron Max

Irrelevant.

Though you don't seem uninterested either since you make a special point of commenting on me in these threads, and always with the intention of downplaying what I have posted. Now why would that be, do you think?

..., and always with the intention of downplaying what I have posted. Now why would that be, do you think?

Because all of your posts are nothing but biased propaganda!

You are an Indian, you should be much more concerned about your own nation than slinging mud at others. People who live in fucked up nations with a gazillion problems shouldn't go around trying to point out and solve the problems of others. That's just being hippo-critical and assinine!

As I said, Sam, you're a damned good propagandist ....and my guess is that you're paid a lot of money to do it.

Baron Max

Because all of your posts are nothing but biased propaganda!

You are an Indian, you should be much more concerned about your own nation than slinging mud at others. People who live in fucked up nations with a gazillion problems shouldn't go around trying to point out and solve the problems of others. That's just being hippo-critical and assinine!

As I said, Sam, you're a damned good propagandist ....and my guess is that you're paid a lot of money to do it.

Baron Max

So lets hear your unbiased nonopinion on the Christians in the nonstate of Palestine.

So lets hear your unbiased nonopinion on the Christians in the nonstate of Palestine.

I'd rather hear your opinion of the "Untouchables" and other "low-class" people of India ....and how well they function in everyday Indian life.

I'd also like to hear your opinion about the rampant corruption in Indian politics and social services and education.

I'd also like to hear your opinion about the people of Northern India who are fighting for their rights to their homeland ....which the Indian government doesn't want them to have.

Baron Max

I'd rather hear your opinion of the "Untouchables" and other "low-class" people of India ....and how well they function in everyday Indian life.

I'd also like to hear your opinion about the rampant corruption in Indian politics and social services and education.

I'd also like to hear your opinion about the people of Northern India who are fighting for their rights to their homeland ....which the Indian government doesn't want them to have.

Baron Max

Irrelevant.

This thread is about Palestine.

Answer the question.

Irrelevant.

This thread is about Palestine.

Answer the question.

Fuck the Palestinians!

Baron Max

Fuck the Palestinians!

Baron Max

You do realise that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, in what is modern day Palestine?

You do realise that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, in what is modern day Palestine?

So who gives a shit about where someone in history was born?? Why should I care? Why should anyone care?

By the way, what does "modern day Palestine" mean exactly, Sam????

Baron Max

So who gives a shit about where someone in history was born?? Why should I care? Why should anyone care?

By the way, what does "modern day Palestine" mean exactly, Sam????

Baron Max

So you don't give a shit about Bethlehem or the people in it, including the Christians.

So why are you posting in this thread?

So why are you posting in this thread?

To continue to expose you as a hypocritical, paid propagandist.

Baron Max

To continue to expose you as a hypocritical, paid propagandist.

Baron Max

Why?

Why?

Because I want to. And I hate, HATE, your self-righteous, pompous, know-it-all, holier-than-thou attitude, ....not to mention how you're ignoring the major human rights and political corruption problems in your own nation of India! ..even while singing the praises of that horribly backward nation of India!

Baron Max

Because I want to. And I hate, HATE, your self-righteous, pompous, know-it-all, holier-than-thou attitude, ....not to mention how you're ignoring the major human rights and political corruption problems in your own nation of India! ..even while singing the praises of that horribly backward nation of India!

Baron Max

But aren't you the one who said:

Just one more person's opinion, Sam. That don't make anything right or wrong or good or bad or .....anything else. Opinions are like the grains of sand on an endless beach.

One person's opinion is nothing but one opinion ....and means nothing in the way of proof or evidence of anything.

It's what society expects of us all, that's why. And we always want to do and say and act just the way the rest of society wants us to, right? I mean, to go against society in any way, shape or form is ...well, it ain't nice.

It's all about "all of the people", not just what you or I want or need. That's the way civilizations/society live and function ...without it, they'd all fall by the wayside.

Yeah, it's pretty easy to be self-righteous, liberal and pure ...when one has weapons that can destroy entire planets, and shields that can keep the enemy's weapons from harming you.

AMERICA - my country, right or wrong - MY COUNTRY!

The American people voted for the government to represent them in peacetime and in war. Whatever my nation decides to do if fully approved, beforehand, by the people of this great nation.

AMERICA - my country, right or wrong - MY COUNTRY!



etc:p

Besides aren't you inflicting your self-righteous, pompous, know-it-all, holier-than-thou attitude on others too? :D

More confabulations.

Observation:

1. Before Israel was formed, Palestinian Christians formed 10% of the population. After the formation of Israel, the proportion of Palestinian Christians dropped until today when it is a bare 2% of the population in Palestine.

2. When Israel was first formed, Christians formed 20% of the population of Israeli Arabs. Today they are around 10%.

Conclusion: The Palestinian Christians are suffering/escaping due to Islam.

:rolleyes:

Speaking of confabulations (assuming your numbers are correct - source?):

1. 2% is 20% of 10%. Thus, Palestinian Christians underwent a drop of 80%, population-wise.

2. 10% is 50% of 20%. Thus, Arab Israelis had a drop of 50% in total population.

Conclusion:...50% is equivalent to 80%?

:rolleyes:

Speaking of confabulations (assuming your numbers are correct - source?):

1. 2% is 20% of 10%. Thus, Palestinian Christians underwent a drop of 80%, population-wise.

2. 10% is 50% of 20%. Thus, Arab Israelis had a drop of 50% in total population.

Conclusion:...50% is equivalent to 80%?

:rolleyes:

We're distinguishing between different numbers here.

Total Christians in Palestine vs those in Israel.

edit:source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Christian

And its just 2% of Israelis now who are Palestinian Christians.


The Palestinian Christians are Palestinians who follow Christianity. Comprising some 10% of the Palestinian population worldwide, they make up anywhere between 1.1 - 2.4% of the population of Gaza and West Bank (Palestinian territories), and about 2% of the population of Israel[1].

Still more irrelevant opinions:

http://www.openbethlehem.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=113&Itemid=17

Thanks for the opinions - however, the heritage is not the people themselves. And if the PA is corrupt, who would honestly report disagreements with a Palestinian agency?

I note this from an article at the same site:

And in private some say they now dress more conservatively. There have also been fights between Christian and Muslim families.

Father Majdi Syriani says the problem is not local, but global.

"The whole world is polarising around western Christianity and Islam," he says. "This is a true threat, not for me but the whole world."

"Bethlehem is the focal point. It's not because my Muslim people are threatening me. It's because the whole world is polarising. And it scares me."

http://www.openbethlehem.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=29&Itemid=7

The trend, as usual, emerges. Blaming it on a worldwide trend is not absolution of the locals.

Best,

Geoff

Thanks for the opinions - however, the heritage is not the people themselves. And if the PA is corrupt, who would honestly report disagreements with a Palestinian agency?

I note this from an article at the same site:

The trend, as usual, emerges. Blaming it on a worldwide trend is not absolution of the locals.

Best,

Geoff

Here's a first hand report:

http://www.amazon.com/Am-Palestinian-Christian-Mitri-Raheb/dp/080062663X
"I Am a Palestinian Christian," written by Mitri Raheb, describes life as a Palestinian Christian under Israeli rule. Raheb is not against the state of Israel (though he is against Israeli persecution of Palestinians) but seeks a Palestinian state as well. He challenges the West (especially Christians) to bring Palestinians aid and to not blindly support Israel's every action. Raheb as well gives biblical theology to why he believes the land of Israel is not promised to the Jewish people alone but to all people. His theology goes further in saying that persecution towards Palestinians is an act of injustice and that the church must prevent, instead of encourage, such acts. Raheb's book "I Am a Palestinian Christian" was written to inform Western Christians about the Palestinian Christian's reality.


And another:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-06-05-opcom_x.htm
The reality is that some 15% of the world's Palestinians are Christians, a vibrant community that has experienced as much suffering as Palestinian Muslims. In the latest uprising for freedom, Palestinian Christians have been among those killed or maimed for life by Israeli bullets. Christians also have been among the Palestinians who have been unable to leave their towns, go to their jobs, seek medical care and attend schools

We're distinguishing between different numbers here.

Total Christians in Palestine vs those in Israel.

edit:source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Christian

And its just 2% of Israelis now who are Palestinian Christians.

Same article:

The British newspaper The Telegraph once published an article about an 'Islamic mafia' that has conducted a series of attacks on the Palestinian Christian community, largely in the form of land thefts. Some observers claim that this represents a pattern of deliberate mistreatment by the Palestinian Authority; others hold that these are isolated incidents that reflect the beliefs of the individuals involved, but not the society in general. In a 2006 poll of Palestinian Christians in Bethlehem, 90% reported having Muslim friends, 73.3% agreed that the Palestinian Authority treats Christian heritage in the city with respect and 78% attributed the ongoing exodus of Christians from Bethlehem to the Israeli blockade on the town. However, this does not explain why the number of Muslims leaving is significantly smaller. Two American courts, one in Illinois and the other in North Carolina, have accepted the threat of "religious persecution" as grounds for granting asylum to two Evangelical converts from Islam fleeing PA territory, although it is not clear if their reason for fleeing was solely due to the fact that they are converts. Converting from Islam is viewed very unfavorably in Islamic tradition.

Par for the course; no birdies, no eagles, no doves.

Best,

Geoff

Same article:



Par for the course; no birdies, no eagles, no doves.

Best,

Geoff

You should read some more.

Why is the percentage of Muslims leaving significantly smaller?

Its percentage, not numbers.

Here's a first hand report:

Oh, I never said that Israel should be absolved of all wrongdoing. But now in addition to bullets and unemployment, they must dodge land grabs and dhimmitude. And I'd thought the previous article indicated that muslim Palestinians were more likely to have lost a family member in confrontations with the IDF?

Best,

Geoff

You should read some more.

Why is the percentage of Muslims leaving significantly smaller?

Its percentage, not numbers.

I didn't write the article. You'll have to take it up with them. ;)

Best,

Geoff

Oh, I never said that Israel should be absolved of all wrongdoing. But now in addition to bullets and unemployment, they must dodge land grabs and dhimmitude. And I'd thought the previous article indicated that muslim Palestinians were more likely to have lost a family member in confrontations with the IDF?

Best,

Geoff

So what are they dodging in Israel ?

Suicide bombings, one supposes. Also rocket attacks. And even a constabulary that's none too sure at times which "side" they fall on.

So...what are they dodging in the rest of the ummah? An overdose of love? No one likes legal systems that create 'superior' citizens...especially if they're all clingy. Eww.

Best,

Geoff

Suicide bombings, one supposes. Also rocket attacks. And even a constabulary that's none too sure at times which "side" they fall on.

So...what are they dodging in the rest of the ummah? An overdose of love? No one likes legal systems that create 'superior' citizens...especially if they're all clingy. Eww.

Best,

Geoff

Evidence?

Evidence?

As good as you are about digging out the shit of other nations, you don't seem to be so eager to dig around in google for this one ....why?

Or are you too busy reading up in google about the horrendous problems in India that you just don't have time to dig up info on this issue?

Baron Max

Evidence?

I thought it was manifest in the above articles: to which one adds islamic pressure and unemployment.

Best,

Geoff

Fooled you. Different kind of land grabs this time.

Geoff

you got me there.

especially when you use a piece by KHALED ABU TOAMEH who is a mouth piece for right-wing zionists and trotted out as frequently as Walid Shoebat.:rolleyes:

I don't think I hammered on this as hard as it ought to have been when it appeared. Toameh is a fellow muslim, and of the opinion that islam, also, has been 'hijacked'. Wheter or not this is an opinion that he and I share, you seem to be taking issue with a fellow that believes much as you do and accusing him of being "trotted out by Zionists". You also feel Shoebat falls in the same category. What reformers then can one support, Sam, when even you deride them?

Best,

Geoff

I don't think I hammered on this as hard as it ought to have been when it appeared. Toameh is a fellow muslim, and of the opinion that islam, also, has been 'hijacked'. Wheter or not this is an opinion that he and I share, you seem to be taking issue with a fellow that believes much as you do and accusing him of being "trotted out by Zionists". You also feel Shoebat falls in the same category. What reformers then can one support, Sam, when even you deride them?

Best,

Geoff

Honest ones.

Honest ones.

That's pretty subjective, Sam .....got any hints of what you might term "honest"??

Baron Max

I bet "honest" people always agree with her.

I bet "honest" people always agree with her.

Yeah, and I'll bet she/he posts some more fuckin' links instead of typing out her/his own opinion about it, too.

"Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Muslims of the world."

Baron Max

Honest ones.

Defined as...?

Defined as...?

One thats not working for a right wing Israeli newspaper and endorsed by prominent Islamophobes like Robert Spencer.

Well, first off illustrate how he's endorsed by a right wing Israeli newspaper. Second, illustrate why Robert Spencer is an "islamophobe" - and define "islamophobia". Explain why he, as a muslim, isn't allowed to criticize islam either. Illustrate why "right wing" means dishonest, or why Robert Spencer is.

Toameh and Shoebat hold precisely the same attitudes about islam as you do, Sam: so either defend your ad homeinem on something better than grounds of association, or retract it.

Well, first off illustrate how he's endorsed by a right wing Israeli newspaper. Second, illustrate why Robert Spencer is an "islamophobe" - and define "islamophobia". Explain why he, as a muslim, isn't allowed to criticize islam either. Illustrate why "right wing" means dishonest, or why Robert Spencer is.

Toameh and Shoebat hold precisely the same attitudes about islam as you do, Sam: so either defend your ad homeinem on something better than grounds of association, or retract it.

Oh he can do as he likes of course. But I've read his stuff (and Robert Spencer's ) and thats just spreading hate. No reform will ever come from those two.

I base my opinion on what I read of their work and I stand by it.

Oh he can do as he likes of course. But I've read his stuff (and Robert Spencer's ) and thats just spreading hate. No reform will ever come from those two.

I base my opinion on what I read of their work and I stand by it.

Then [i]prove[/] what you say is valid. Illustrate the problems. Isolate phrases of their proving their islamophobia. They want the same thing as you, the only difference being your apparent unwillingness to engage in a really critical discussion of the subject.

You might well stand by your personal impression of the importance of the Flat Earth Society, but without debate, your stance is meaningless.

Yes, give us an example.

Then [i]prove[/] what you say is valid. Illustrate the problems. Isolate phrases of their proving their islamophobia. They want the same thing as you, the only difference being your apparent unwillingness to engage in a really critical discussion of the subject.

You might well stand by your personal impression of the importance of the Flat Earth Society, but without debate, your stance is meaningless.

I find them both unbalanced in their presentations. Sort of like Memri. Its not what they said, its what they didn't say.

I much prefer reading a Haaretz article to anything by Toameh and an Irshad Manji article to anything by Spencer.

Toameh omits the Palestinian sufferings in his rhetoric and Spencer sensationalizes the extremists and represents them as a majority view point by his editorial opinions.

You can read on Spencer here

http://watchjihadwatch.blogspot.com/

I find them both unbalanced in their presentations. Sort of like Memri. Its not what they said, its what they didn't say.

Oh?

So naturally Syrian TV and al-Manar are, in fact, filled with articles of love about their fellow "People of the Book": those beloved and respected people. Government media organs from Morocco to Malaysia are, in fact, packed with glowing articles about the wonderful people of Israel...that nation that none of them officially recognize. Or about Christianity...the conversion to which is, of course, illegal in their nations.

Yes. Right.

I much prefer reading a Haaretz article to anything by Toameh and an Irshad Manji article to anything by Spencer.

Toameh omits the Palestinian sufferings in his rhetoric and Spencer sensationalizes the extremists and represents them as a majority view point by his editorial opinions.

You might argue Toameh: then again, what are the precise nature of lamentations by Palestinian TV about the casualties Israelis suffer at the hands of terrorists, including terrorists directed by their new government?

As for Spencer, rather, he suspects that such views are the majority, and I don't disagree with him. Textbooks in various islamic countries make no bones about how one ought to refer to and treat non-muslims, and neither are positive. Such works even find their way into private islamic schools in Britain. One can only speculate on what more is being said away from the camera, away from the public eye, yet from human nature it could quite rationally be concluded that if only x is known, y is invariably going to be much, much worse.

As Spencer often points out, apostacy is illegal in islamic nations. Insulting the 'prophet' Mohammed is also illegal. And when the call to punish non-muslims or apostates goes up, there never seems to be any shortage of an angry crowd. When that al-Hilali made his incredibly misogynistic call against women without the hijab as "uncovered meat", he was able to summon up 5,000 supporters without any difficulty at all. Public opinion too when the Pakistani convert to Christianity appeared was to kill him; it was seen as something of a shock that Western nations would oppose such a thing. The merest insult to Mohammed is greeted with rage and embassy burning. And it is difficult to believe - among other things - that the prejudicial nature of islamic law could possibly have been established without a common, bigoted religious perspective on which to draw in dealings with women, non-muslims and homosexuals. Those that cry on and on that this is not "true" islam seem never to have read the Quran, or the hadiths. Rather, it seems that this is true islam; and it is exceedingly difficult if not impossible for one to find any theological arguments against it. Now, it might be that many people are desperate to leave islam, and that the liberalization of islamic nations might allow this. Yet it is difficult to know when the renunciation of islam is illegal throughout the ummah, either because of an inherent islamic supremacism, or because of the near-total failure of faith and state in islamic nations (which posits all converts as apostates and traitors not merely to religion but - because the state is religious - to the government itself). And it is difficult to believe such claims when all many moderate muslims have ever done - as illustrated here - is point the finger of blame elsewhere, rather than take a long hard look at how their brethen really believe and practice their religion in the ummah and abroad. It does not help that thehe very terms of the religion itself are prejudicial and supremacist as applied to other theists (and non-theists): jihad, shaheed, shirk, al-insan al-kamil, kufr, naij, dhimmi. What are we then to make of them?

You can read on Spencer here

http://watchjihadwatch.blogspot.com/

Indeed, and I have. Unfortunately, the site's thesis on Spencer is, as yours to date, empty and void. It does not hold water. I continue to read, but I am not particularly impressed to date. Did you have a specific argument from his site to discuss?

Although I do note you seem to be making use of "Pitiful"'s argumentative point that:

The crux of this scholarly argument is, and I paraphrase, "Just because there is no evidence, does not mean it is not so..."

Though perhaps not in the spirit he intended. ;) Did you want to debate that topic to start?

Again you're spouting Jihad watch.

You've convinced yourself you know what Muslims think like.

Again all that you've said may be literally true, but is not the practise, except among uneducated people with no exposure to society or education.

Homosexuality is illegal in India, does that mean Indian homosexuals languish in prison.

Caste discrimination is illegal in India, so is dowry burning, honor killings, child marriage, female infanticide. Does that mean it never happens. Does it reflect Hinduism?

If you do a google search you'll find hundreds of instances of every kind of human failing. All you need to do is find a way to dress it up to suit your agenda.

And so, al-Manar and Syria TV is also not on my list of credible journalism.

People like Robert Spencer are an insult to the Muslim majority and are the ones who endorse and provide justification for extremism.

I've met a lot of Muslim women and this is pure BS. As is the abrogation thing, which is not accepted by mainstream Muslims.

You're expressing the viewpoint of a minority(probably Jihad watch), probably one that would be present in the West as well.

I posted this here since someone seems to have shut down the other thread.

As for your comment on muslim women: where? In Pakistan or Iran or Afghanistan or here? In front of the religious police or behind their back? The fact alone that such police exist, that such laws exist and, regrettably for your argument, are enforced, illustrates that the basis for my interpretation is quite sound.

By the by, JW is not a radical islamic site. The first part of your statement appears to be confusing it with radical islamism as a source for such opinions.

Although I do note you seem to be making use of "Pitiful"'s argumentative point that:



Though perhaps not in the spirit he intended. ;) Did you want to debate that topic to start?

Frankly I stopped reading Spencer some years ago. No I'm not interested in debating anything about him. He's insulting and leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I posted this here since someone seems to have shut down the other thread.

As for your comment on muslim women: where? In Pakistan or Iran or Afghanistan or here? In front of the religious police or behind their back? The fact alone that such police exist, that such laws exist and, regrettably for your argument, are enforced, illustrates that the basis for my interpretation is quite sound.

By the by, JW is not a radical islamic site. The first part of your statement appears to be confusing it with radical islamism as a source for such opinions.

I think you miss the point that Pakistan is a dictator ship. Iran was on a different path before the Savak. Afghanistan was on a different path before the Soviets.


And Muslim women everywhere. My grandmother was a Pathan and was incredibly liberal. I've met Saudi women with no education at all who would make American women shrivel in their shoes. Pakistani women? Meet them before you comment.

Irani women? There's an Irani girl right now in my lab who is an intern from whom I'm learning about them.

Most probably all your information is based on Spencers site, the main "source" of "majority" Muslim opinion.

Again you're spouting Jihad watch.

You've convinced yourself you know what Muslims think like.

Again all that you've said may be literally true, but is not the practise, except among uneducated people with no exposure to society or education.

What? You mean like lawmakers in Riyadh, Tripoli, Cairo, Islamabad and Tehran? Those kind of people? Although uneducated, they seem to feel that they have some kind of object in determining law there - and they do.

Homosexuality is illegal in India, does that mean Indian homosexuals languish in prison.

Caste discrimination is illegal in India, so is dowry burning, honor killings, child marriage, female infanticide. Does that mean it never happens. Does it reflect Hinduism?

Is it based in Hinduism? Are there Hindu scriptures supporting it?

On the contrast: are there Hindu organizations working to overthrow it?

If you do a google search you'll find hundreds of instances of every kind of human failing. All you need to do is find a way to dress it up to suit your agenda.

Well I regret to tell you that the legal views espoused by these nations on apostacy and women and homosexuality are derived from the 'agenda' of the Quran and the hadiths, which is to say, islam. Can islam separate itself from these views? Possibly. I agree that many places have many failings, but if such failings are passed into law then they are no longer technically "failings" from the view of the host country, and particularly not so if they are supported by the populace at large. What proportion of the residents of the ummah support the punishment of apostates or insulters of Mohammed? Would it be unreasonable for me to predict that the percentage would be quite high?

And so, al-Manar and Syria TV is also not on my list of credible journalism.

People like Robert Spencer are an insult to the Muslim majority and are the ones who endorse and provide justification for extremism.

This is ridiculous. I am glad to hear that you don't appreciate al-Manar and Syrian TV (did you catch "Knight Without a Horse"? wonderful :rolleyes: ) but your point was that "what isn't being reported by MEMRI is all the wonderful things islam really feels about non-muslims" and I was wondering where, in the apparatus of these nations including their media, one might find some positive articles about non-muslims. Maybe they're there. Who knows? It's just that I rather doubt it.

And as for him "provide justification for extremism", please give that disingenuous nonsense up. No extremist turns to Spencer for ammunition; he could provide nothing they hadn't already heard from their imam at the pulpit, their shiekh, and their neighbours. Moreover: what is the rule then? Reformers may not listen to criticism from non-muslims? And - from your damning of Toameh - they may not listen to it from muslims either. Who then is left? Only the "approved" candidates? Which line must they parrot?

I think you miss the point that Pakistan is a dictator ship. Iran was on a different path before the Savak. Afghanistan was on a different path before the Soviets.


And Muslim women everywhere. My grandmother was a Pathan and was incredibly liberal. I've met Saudi women with no education at all who would make American women shrivel in their shoes. Pakistani women? Meet them before you comment.

Irani women? There's an Irani girl right now in my lab who is an intern from whom I'm learning about them.

Most probably all your information is based on Spencers site, the main "source" of "majority" Muslim opinion.

I've known a few - Iranian, Egyptian, Syrian - and all struck me as the stereotype: for starters, they didn't dare bring me home. Maybe it was BO, but rather I think it was something to do with the religious angle. I can only imagine if we'd been in the ME.

These places you list are dictatorships. Fine. What about the rest of the ummah, where the evil US never stuck its nose? What about them? What about Saudi Arabia, which only disavowed slavery in 1964?

And as for Spencer's impressions, where do you think he gets his information? The Quran, the hadiths, and MSM coverage. Do you think he invents the polling information, or the news stories he covers?

Please.

What? You mean like lawmakers in Riyadh, Tripoli, Cairo, Islamabad and Tehran? Those kind of people? Although uneducated, they seem to feel that they have some kind of object in determining law there - and they do.

Of course they do, they are dictatorships.

How difficult was it to attack Iraq?


Is it based in Hinduism? Are there Hindu scriptures supporting it?

On the contrast: are there Hindu organizations working to overthrow it?

Well it is practised by them, based on laws of Manu.

Sure women's groups campaigning but mainly in cities.

How long would such a group last in a closed community?

Ask the dalits.

Well I regret to tell you that the legal views espoused by these nations on apostacy and women and homosexuality are derived from the 'agenda' of the Quran and the hadiths, which is to say, islam. Can islam separate itself from these views? Possibly. I agree that many places have many failings, but if such failings are passed into law then they are no longer technically "failings" from the view of the host country, and particularly not so if they are supported by the populace at large. What proportion of the residents of the ummah support the punishment of apostates or insulters of Mohammed? Would it be unreasonable for me to predict that the percentage would be quite high?

I can actually see Spencer in these words.
And yes, its mostly BS.

The First World passes many laws which propagate starvation in Third world countries. They justify them using the argument of free trade. If free trade leads to mass starvation, can it be justified? Apparently so. Is it the hallmark of a democratic society. Well, they ALL practise it. Are there groups campaigning against it? Yes, but how many people are aware of it?

Its the same with Islam. You can find justification for anything if you look hard enough. Does not make it right.

This is ridiculous. I am glad to hear that you don't appreciate al-Manar and Syrian TV (did you catch "Knight Without a Horse"? wonderful :rolleyes: ) but your point was that "what isn't being reported by MEMRI is all the wonderful things islam really feels about non-muslims" and I was wondering where, in the apparatus of these nations including their media, one might find some positive articles about non-muslims. Maybe they're there. Who knows? It's just that I rather doubt it.

For example, has Memri/Spencer/Toameh ever shown this?

http://www.combatantsforpeace.org/article.asp?lng=eng

Or any of this?

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=63240



And as for him "provide justification for extremism", please give that disingenuous nonsense up. No extremist turns to Spencer for ammunition; he could provide nothing they hadn't already heard from their imam at the pulpit, their shiekh, and their neighbours. Moreover: what is the rule then? Reformers may not listen to criticism from non-muslims? And - from your damning of Toameh - they may not listen to it from muslims either. Who then is left? Only the "approved" candidates? Which line must they parrot?

Yes he does. He puts out stuff about Islam of which he has little or no understanding and provides this information to young Muslim men frustrated with their lot and with even less understanding of Islam. Its a great recruiting tool.

I've known a few - Iranian, Egyptian, Syrian - and all struck me as the stereotype: for starters, they didn't dare bring me home. Maybe it was BO, but rather I think it was something to do with the religious angle. I can only imagine if we'd been in the ME.

These places you list are dictatorships. Fine. What about the rest of the ummah, where the evil US never stuck its nose? What about them? What about Saudi Arabia, which only disavowed slavery in 1964?

And as for Spencer's impressions, where do you think he gets his information? The Quran, the hadiths, and MSM coverage. Do you think he invents the polling information, or the news stories he covers?

Please.


Bringing a boy home would be a difficult proposition in many conservative countries. I know Christian girls in Bombay who conceal their boyfriends from their parents and Muslim girls who don't (both of my sisters are married to non Muslims). So what? Everyone is not American? Does not get drunk on weekends and pass out in the bar? Sleep with a different boy every month? Amazing.

Are these countries conservative, like India? Then you'll probably find they have a lot in common. What, just because the West discovered liberation after the war ,they are shocked that everyone else has not? Well Saudi Arabia had no Jewish holocaust either.

Spencer gets his information from translations of Hadith and Quran, I doubt he actually reads Arabic. And those are a dime a dozen.

Of course they do, they are dictatorships.

How difficult was it to attack Iraq?

Difficult! It required some kind of evidence, trumped-up or not.

Well it is practised by them, based on laws of Manu.

Then I am in opposition. Yet I hear of no such troubles regarding female in the Hindu immigrant community. Is adherence then so high, so strong?

I can actually see Spencer in these words.
And yes, its mostly BS.

While I thank you for your high praise of me, I don't agree with the second point. Why is it BS? How do you know?

The First World passes many laws which propagate starvation in Third world countries. They justify them using the argument of free trade. If free trade leads to mass starvation, can it be justified? Apparently so. Is it the hallmark of a democratic society. Well, they ALL practise it. Are there groups campaigning against it? Yes, but how many people are aware of it?

Which laws in particular were you referring to? I should note that if you're comparing the treatment of women and non-muslims in sharia to that of how one nation might look on another nation, you're tacitly admitting that muslims view non-muslims as outsiders - as other nations, other peoples - which does not strike me as particularly ecumenical. I agree that the First World does indeed have an obligation not to cause suffering in the Third World, of course. But there is no religious paradigm, no legal basis of structure in any First World doctrine that says "death to the un-First Worlder, for they are the enemy". Yet such doctrines do occur in the Quran and the hadiths.

Its the same with Islam. You can find justification for anything if you look hard enough. Does not make it right.

Then you'll forgive me for opining that islam has no place in politics, or on any kind of legal scene.

For example, has Memri/Spencer/Toameh ever shown this?

I don't know, since I'd rather not click the quote, but I expect not. Is this the point? How about all the good the US does in the world? All the money in aid it gives out, or the good it tries to do, while frequently botching it for unforseen reasons? I don't believe you've ever noted it. Or are you, like Spencer, focused on the problems of the world as you see them first, and the good your subtle ideological opponents provide after? I see things in the same way: it is not the good men do, but the problems they create, that I need rectify.

Yes he does. He puts out stuff about Islam of which he has little or no understanding and provides this information to young Muslim men frustrated with their lot and with even less understanding of Islam. Its a great recruiting tool.

?? "Provides this information to young Muslim men"?? What, you mean like the ones that threaten to kill him and disrupt his public speech? Those ones? I had no idea they were disciples of Rob. I'll have to have a chat with that lot.

Again: don't be ridiculous. Those individuals are getting their "education" elsewhere, and you know it. Spencer hopes for better. He loads his position with a great deal of provisos - "maybe there are moderates", "I hope that his position is not more general" and the like. You will not find the actual masters of the frustrated doing the same.

And since when is their frustration my bloody lookout? What the hell are they frustrated about that I've never been frustrated about? Tell the stupid bastards to grow the hell up. Ridiculous children.

Best,

Geoff

Bringing a boy home would be a difficult proposition in many conservative countries. I know Christian girls in Bombay who conceal their boyfriends from their parents and Muslim girls who don't (both of my sisters are married to non Muslims). So what? Everyone is not American? Does not get drunk on weekends and pass out in the bar? Sleep with a different boy every month? Amazing.

But, if you knew American women, you'd know they're not like that. You see, I know a great many American (and other) women, and none of them are like that. I don't know any that conceal their boyfriends from their parents, save for a few offspring of religious extremists, including one Baptist. Now, I doubt she'd be hacked to death by her brother for seeing me - and actually, she was just a friend anyway - but muslim girls often are. Their hiding things is symptomatic.

Are these countries conservative, like India? Then you'll probably find they have a lot in common. What, just because the West discovered liberation after the war ,they are shocked that everyone else has not? Well Saudi Arabia had no Jewish holocaust either.

Well, if girls in any country are in fear of their lives for sexual relations - Iran springs to mind - then those nations, too, need serious work. In any event, I think India is something of an exception to the usual islamic rule.

Spencer gets his information from translations of Hadith and Quran, I doubt he actually reads Arabic. And those are a dime a dozen.

Actually, he does read Arabic. And here we are back on this old rub: you can only understand if you read Arabic. Right. Could Mohammed read Aramaic, that he knew how evil the Jews were? In fact, could he read at all?

Food calls, and I must anon. The field - such as it is - is temporarily yours.

Best,

Geoff

Difficult! It required some kind of evidence, trumped-up or not.

Not really. And these are educated people with exposure to the world.


Then I am in opposition. Yet I hear of no such troubles regarding female in the Hindu immigrant community. Is adherence then so high, so strong?

They haven't attacked the US yet.

Once they do, you'll hear all about it.


While I thank you for your high praise of me, I don't agree with the second point. Why is it BS? How do you know?


Which laws in particular were you referring to? I should note that if you're comparing the treatment of women and non-muslims in sharia to that of how one nation might look on another nation, you're tacitly admitting that muslims view non-muslims as outsiders - as other nations, other peoples - which does not strike me as particularly ecumenical. I agree that the First World does indeed have an obligation not to cause suffering in the Third World, of course. But there is no religious paradigm, no legal basis of structure in any First World doctrine that says "death to the un-First Worlder, for they are the enemy". Yet such doctrines do occur in the Quran and the hadiths.


Just saying that laws and their justifications can be manipulated by any politician, using any ideology, doesn't have to be religion.


Then you'll forgive me for opining that islam has no place in politics, or on any kind of legal scene.

See above

I don't know, since I'd rather not click the quote, but I expect not. Is this the point? How about all the good the US does in the world? All the money in aid it gives out, or the good it tries to do, while frequently botching it for unforseen reasons? I don't believe you've ever noted it. Or are you, like Spencer, focused on the problems of the world as you see them first, and the good your subtle ideological opponents provide after? I see things in the same way: it is not the good men do, but the problems they create, that I need rectify.

I suggest you look up the foreign aid process first. To whom it is given, what are the conditions and laws attached to American aid and who benefits from it. Then we can discuss it.

?? "Provides this information to young Muslim men"?? What, you mean like the ones that threaten to kill him and disrupt his public speech? Those ones? I had no idea they were disciples of Rob. I'll have to have a chat with that lot.

Again: don't be ridiculous. Those individuals are getting their "education" elsewhere, and you know it. Spencer hopes for better. He loads his position with a great deal of provisos - "maybe there are moderates", "I hope that his position is not more general" and the like. You will not find the actual masters of the frustrated doing the same.


Most people are getting their education off the net these days and Jihad watch is a popular site for those wanting to indoctrinate young men and looking for the means and justification to do it.

And since when is their frustration my bloody lookout? What the hell are they frustrated about that I've never been frustrated about? Tell the stupid bastards to grow the hell up. Ridiculous children.



Only since any one with a Mohammed in his name gets treated like a terrorist, self included.

Not really. And these are educated people with exposure to the world.

Yeees, it did require some kind of evidence, or else the American people would simply not have gone along with it. Popular sentiment has already ended wars for the Americans. Anyway, this is not really the point of the thread.

They haven't attacked the US yet.

Once they do, you'll hear all about it.

And once they do, I shall oppose it more vehemently. Have they attacked anywhere else? Do they do even the remotest fraction of the damage that islamic terrorism has yet wrought?

Just saying that laws and their justifications can be manipulated by any politician, using any ideology, doesn't have to be religion.

Agreed: it certainly does not have to be religion. Myself, I could not care less whether the motivation is religion or some other unprovable philosophy; I oppose injustice, and that includes some of the actions of First Worlders elsewhere, and also those of communists or leftists like myself. I abhor Chinese communism, Sovietism being no better; and we on the left do both our name and our calling a disservice by taking up with the likes of idiots merely because we think they oppose US hedgemony. Guevara might well have been a successful revolutionary and at least helped throw out some running dogs; at the same time, his track record was not exactly clean and so I am skeptical of him, too. Anyway, I'm getting off track here.

I suggest you look up the foreign aid process first. To whom it is given, what are the conditions and laws attached to American aid and who benefits from it. Then we can discuss it.

Very well; I shall do so. I promise no expediency, since I am bogged down in professional matters.

Most people are getting their education off the net these days and Jihad watch is a popular site for those wanting to indoctrinate young men and looking for the means and justification to do it.

And you honestly think they go to JW first, which condemns such viewpoints?

Only since any one with a Mohammed in his name gets treated like a terrorist, self included.

...your middle name is Mohammed? Were your parents confused, or merely surprised? ;) j/k, apologies

Anon, Samwise.

Geoff