Top 10 Misapprehensions about islam...

That was supposed to have been banned by the UN.

It was, come to think of it. Witness Kuwait in 92. But none of the several UN resolutions mandating Israel's return to civilized behavior have managed to attract enforcement or backing.

The Palestinians seem to be without avenues for obtaining justice.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

actually I believe that idea was a product born out of the franco-prussian war but i may be mistaken.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Wrong!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

Wrong again, the israelis had all ready agreed and settled, look at the land the Palestinians could have had if they hadn't gone to war.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.png
Instead it now looks like this.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/Is-wb-gs-gh_v3.png
It does make you wonder why the israelis didn't take all the land, concidering they weren't the instigators of the conflict. it just goes to show that they were trying to adhere to the UN charter.

Wrong! yet again the Palestinians had aid from the surrrounding arab states, that incidently didn't attack the previous occupiers of the land of Cannan, it was only the israelis they didn't like.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab-Israeli_War.

The palestinians had lived under an occupying force for over 350 years, Now they were offered land, not all the land merited, Are the Palestinians ancestors of the Canaanites? or simply Arab squatters? The lands the Palestinians call home, was never declared theirs until 1948. they wanted it all, they just didn't want Israel as neighbours.

Sorry they stole nothing they simple reoccupied the land that was stated was theirs in their bible.
Oh I'm an Arab by the way.
I just hold no hatred toward any colour, creed, religious affliation or nationality of humanity.
The truth often hurts.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I meant the original Crusade, to be specific. The later Crusades were basically just pissing contests between Christian extremists and Islamic ones.

 

.

DNG DNG DNG!!! you're off-topic, this is not israeil-palastine case, also it's a political threat.

 

Not in 1948 it wasn't.

Well do you wonder at it, Palestine won't accept anything but israel out, totally.
So they continue to attack Israel, when they start to act peacefully they will get, the full backing of the UN and the force/forces that go with it.
But sadly that is not in the muslim mind set, they need to put aside the Qu'ran, and work toward peace, once achieved they can go back to the prayer mats and hatred of anything non-muslim.

Mainly because justice is not what they want.

 

So what! it's your thread and you brought Israel and Palestine into the discussion.

 

the original palestinian crusade or the first crusadey thing?

 

the palestinians didn't go to war the Israelis/jews did. but since you have clearly accepted the Israeli version I'm just going to ignore you.

 

Ice, pj: as a neutral observer, I have to say that he gotchaed the both of you. It gives me no pleasure to say so, however.

 

except your not a neutral observer and he is twisting history worse than you do.

 

.

helloooo! i said, this topic is not about israeil-palastine case, also not about politics, if it is not off-topic you tell me..

 

Personal insults aside, mustahafa just nailed you. Now I take pleasure in saying it.

Oy vey: you realize that was just the name of the site, really, and that sandy was talking about a trend, not a specific conflict in that trend?

Haw! I love it! An internal Arab matter. Of course, of course! And it couldn't be an "external Christian/non-Christian" matter? No, no, of course not, what are you saying, Geoff?? How about the geographical issue of the fact that the Arabs all through the Assyrian and Manichean world were also Christians, and Zoroastrians, and Judaists, and a dozen other religions?

OMG. That was too perfect. I'd been waiting for that one, and it was just right. Thanks. "Internal matter": you absurd little clown. Yes, yes: the expansion stopped in 750. Except for Spain and the Balkans and the rest. And why would that be important anyway? Let's say Israel halts on the West Bank; no more settlements. I assume that would be good enough for you then, you useless hypocrite?

 

Then illustrate how he's wrong.

Ah. That was too funny. Thread of the week.

 

Wow! man you get Owned, and your response is to do the childish thing and put them on ignore, that says a lot about you.

 

You are not a neutral observer in this matter, and Mustapha is dealing unsupported and implausible assertions, with a rank odor of bigotry to them where they are not simply false. Here they are, in response to my post:

As of 1945, it was. And Israel has been expanding by force of arms ever since, regardless.
“

Mindreading not backed by evidence. The other Islamic forces involved have at least verbally accepted Israel's existence in some form, and so has every governing body of Palestine to date.

No evidence of that. Israel appears to be the aggressor, and the Palestinians have received no such cooperation from the US in return for their various ceasefires etc.

And we get a look under the rock, for the mindset behind these assertions.

Mindreading again - this time of all Palestinians collectively.

Denying opportunity for justice because the perpetrator claims the victim doesn't want it is hardly a plausible approach. If you are so confident that the Palestinians will reject just settlement of their issues, why not arrange it? - that rejection would be far better justification for the current Israeli behavior than anything we see now.

 

first off I didn't get owned for that to have happened they would have had to been right secondly I didn't put them on ignore I'm just ignoring them.

 

do you not know how to read. how is mention a specific seige of Vienna not mention a specfic conflict?

Could be argued that those religions were forced upon them by the resptive empires that controlled those.

ITs nice to know your incapable of being civil.

no including them. once again dishonety. [QUITE] Let's say Israel halts on the West Bank; no more settlements. I assume that would be good enough for you then, you useless hypocrite?[/QUOTE] No it wouldn't because they still stole land through force. and I'm not a hypocrite.

 

Yea right, the evidence is on his side, I'd go back to the drawing board if I were you, if you really don't think you got owned, your simply kidding yourself.

 

You got owned too, he counted all this with his reply to pjdude. one question, how was Israel even a country in 1945. according to the links supplied by Mustafha the British occupied Palestine, until it was annexed by the UN, and I don't see mind-reading, I see informed guesses given the evidence, I suggest you read the links supplied, you may then realise who are the people who got owned.