West Asia News and Discussions

[abhishek_sharma]

How to end the blockade of Gaza

http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/201 ... de_of_gaza

[Sanku]

Mate, the problem is not Israel as a country, it is Israel in the present state of form, which everyone including the US administration seems to have a problem with.

Sorry, thats semantics, we dont hate you per se but we would be happy if you changed a little, like give up everything, reduce your land to two tiny villages, send back all Israeli to Russia, and return to your Dhimmi status.

Nice but no dice.

No one else has a problem with Israel in the current form, not India, not Russia and certainly not US. They have full relations and no sanctions whatsoever. So please dont expect any of us to buy this.

And even if what if others have a problem? In 1920 the entire world (barring India) was anti-Semtic, so should the Jews die out because "the world had problem with them"

Yeah, no result for the Palestinians after all these years, and people want to give someone else a try. You know there is an argument that Israel wanted these extremists in and was helping Hamas covertly during its inception. They wanted the extremists in power, to show the whole world that they are surrounded by these extremists.

Yes and there is a argument that 9/11 was a Jews conspiracy.

Since when does he convince Palestenians? You probably mean TSP. Its not just about convincing your own population who probably are on your own frequency, but people outside - the neutral guys, public opinion in other countries. I don't think you understand how far ISI actually penetrates its propaganda in western states.

You have side stepped entirely, the matter at hand has nothing to do with "western states" I am only talking about the Arab-Palestiane-Pakistani population showing a equal fervor for anti-Semitic rhetoric and acting on that basis.

The Pali's hate Israel and thats that.

Yeah, they lost, but they are also ashamed that something like that was planned. But these are more Paki's who live away from the propaganda - i.e. abroad.

A Paki is a Paki my friend. There are no two types of Paki's. (Ahmadiya's and Paris are not Pakis by their own standards anyway)

No Mark Regev and IDF lady just come on Al Jazeera just to convince the westerners watching Al Jazeera lol!!! Thats the funniest thing I have heard!

Hey they can bleat the lambness all they want on Al Jazaerra arabic, as I said, good for them and we should do.

Yet clearly they only sell their cool-aid and not also drink it, unlike Shri Ombaba who seem to have drunk stuff which US strictly kept for external consumption.

Nah, that is what the Israeli propaganda wants you to believe. Just watch Ross Kemp on Gaza - they'll tell you about what Gazans really think (considering many of them lived and worked/working in Israel)

I think the actions speak quite eloquently thank you.

Because its worth throwing in the dustbin, at best.

Hehehe. Please do explain. I want to hear this one.

First full acceptance of current situation formally, next no agression pact and clear cut tone down of hamas for 5 years and other tactics. If any Arab or wannabe Arab state plays up the coalition of pro Israel west Asians subdue that. Publicly.

Then we can talk about meaningful talks.

[Sanku]

You know there is an argument that Israel wanted these extremists in and was helping Hamas covertly during its inception. They wanted the extremists in power, to show the whole world that they are surrounded by these extremists.

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2006 ... of-israel/
Hamas, Son of Israel

Read the whole thing.

“Israel and Hamas may currently be locked in deadly combat, but, according to several current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years. Israel ‘aided Hamas directly – the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization),’ said Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the Center for Strategic [and International] Studies. Israel’s support for Hamas ‘was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative,’ said a former senior CIA official.”

If India had supported fundamentalist jihadi groups in Pakistan and is now screaming about Pakistani terrorism, then and only then would India be Israel.

Well actually this is exactly like LTTE, which goes to make my point, Dharma should be followed, Karma is a female dog.

[Chandragupta]

Lol! They won't be ashamed of being Paki, but they certainly are ashamed of what happened in kargil.

Shyam ji, the only reason Pakis would be ashamed of Kargil (if they ever are) is because they got their backsides handed to them on a platter by the Indian Army. That's why they are ashamed, its a big part of their deceptive nature. I am sure even Ghori told Prithviraj that he was ashamed & sorry for attacking. You should ask them if they are ashamed of occupying half of Kashmir, if they are shamed of killing thousands of Indians since 47. You ask your Paki birathers that & come back with answers.

[shyamd]

You freely attribute statements to me that I have never mentioned - like killing all Muslims, etc. Is that a technique you learned from the Muslim Brotherhood or from your Hamas source? So in your faith system, "jews" have already committed all the atrocities that Islamists have perpetrated?

I freely attribute you to those statements because you are hinting at them but not explicitly saying it. Okay lets take your last statement - I post that paragraph in full, so that we can people can read with the context:.

I think Indians and Israelites should begin to thank everyone ranged along the side of Hamas and of the believers of Islamic subjugation of all non-Muslims (Hamas charter and various statements by leading lights of Hamas) for their humanitarian contributions to the cause of human civilization. Once and if genocide of the Jews takes place, and the eastern Mediterranean falls to Islamists - each and every force - from individuals to organizations to groups to parties to nations - which have even remotely favoured Hamas and the various related Jihadis should be remembered for their actions.They should be in the future treated exactly as the Jihadists themselves - which means whatever is applied to Jihadists should be applied to their non-Muslim collaborators. If it is pardon for their crassness so be it! But treat them as collaborators and participants, and never let it be forgotten in future as long as their descendants live or die out.

So you are saying anyone who supported Hamas or a supposed Islamist movement should be treated as a collaborator.
Okay lets take they should be treated exactly as jihadists: depends on which country but most are usually killed - or spend a long long time in prison, if they surrender.
As for your second statement on if it is a pardon so be it, never let it be forgotten in future as long as their descendents live or die out: So you are saying, every family member of a collaborator should be treated as a "family of a collaborator". I said that is akin to jews being having to identify themselves with badges in WWII.

Speaking of treating jews, I must have learned that from the mossad's disnfo campaign:

Iran eyes badges for Jews
Lol! How true that turned out to be, Mossad being too eager to paint Iran as yeeevil Muslim.

If WB and Gaza cannot survive on their own, and Hamas does not want to erase Israel, why are they fighting for independence? Does it not imply then that the formal declarations of Hamas need not actually mean their real intent and purpose? That Hamas is then actually deceptive?

Gaza and WB not surviving on their own, is MY opinion. You are mixing up my opinion with what in my opinion is happening in the region. Hamas is fighting for independence - but started taking steps to climb down and then whack Israel/west sanctioned them anyway.

So whoever has problems with MB is not because MB is in the wrong in any way, but it is always the "other" who is at fault?

Lol! What can I do if the other is at fault? I am just telling you how it is. When people have no choice and vote for the same party for many years, isn't it understandable that people want change? Isn't that how Obama got voted into power - He used Hope and Change as his motto.

Again a continuation of the same mindset - if others have any problem with MB or Hamas, it is the "other's" fault!

Huh? its the people are sick of seeing the same party do nothing but be corrupt - the only other alternative is the MB or Hamas - who seem to be doing a good job for the people, can you not understand that?

Incorrect, they also made the same exception for the Baathists of Syria.

Syria is a whole different story - hehe you probably don't believe me but anyway my source this time is the Head of MB for Syria himself - I am friends with a close relative of his. Lets stick to Israel anyway..

MB's slogan as far as I know, contains the expression "Jihad is our way" - and it does not specifically characterize this Jihad as non-military Jihad.

Lol! Have a look on wiki. They are opposed to violence, hence why Al Qaeda REJECTED Muslim Brotherhood - Muslim brotherhood since its inception has officially opposed violence as a means to achieve its goals.

"General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America" from MB: "The process of settlement is a 'Civilization-Jihadist Process' with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

You forgot to add the bit where it said: However, none of these documents cited any quotes or materials from the Muslim Brotherhood to support the said allegations.

Given your tendency to see no fault with MB or its essentially Palestinian wing Hamas, I am guessing that you will dismiss this as Zionist propaganda.

I don't need to - there is no evidence that HLF is the official MB organisation.

Given your statement that the two places they have - WB+Gaza is unsustainable as independent entities, they cannot have any hope or purpose to do otherwise! Wow - how does Hamas express that kicking desire to you!

Mincing words once again.

MB has supposedly a program to subvert, and penetrate civilian institutions or society in countries where non-Muslims are dominant numerically or are in state power to create sympathetic voices or spokespersons. This whole discussion is getting more and more interesting. It would be interesting to know how many non-Muslim Indians feel the same soft spot for MB and Hamas as you do. Thanks! I was talking this evening with someone who specializes on the Hamas. What she said about the impact assessment of MB and Hamas seduction on the subcontinent now appears so relevant. I read up on your earlier posts on this also. Thanks for drawing my attention to this weak link. The more chinks in the Indian armour exposed - the better.

Lol! BTW, my Hamas source has been right on more than one occasion, the example of rebuilding intelligence after the Hamas takeover of Gaza was written after the 2007 war, look it up in the archives my friend.

[shyamd]

Sorry, thats semantics, we dont hate you per se but we would be happy if you changed a little, like give up everything, reduce your land to two tiny villages, send back all Israeli to Russia, and return to your Dhimmi status.

Lol, you are saying arabs want them to give up everything - a bit of research and reading the article on the 2002 COMPREHENSIVE Peace offer will answer your question on who is giving up what.

I think the debate is heading for the crux of the issue, which is should Israel have existed there. They came aboard ships because they had no where else to go - despite offers to allocate a jewish country in Australia/Uganda and some other places which the jews refused.

Who were living there prior to the exodus? Mainly arabs although the Jewish agency was buying up some land to re-settle jews there and by the end of WWII Jewish population had increased.

No one else has a problem with Israel in the current form, not India, not Russia and certainly not US. They have full relations and no sanctions whatsoever. So please dont expect any of us to buy this.

Urmm.... Okay.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_%E2 ... #Jerusalem

Since capturing East Jerusalem in the 1967 Six Day War, Israel has insisted that Jerusalem is its eternal and indivisible capital. The United States does not agree with this position and believes the permanent status of Jerusalem is still subject to negotiations. This is based on the UN's 1947 Partition plan for Palestine, which called for separate international administration of Jerusalem.

The Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo Accords signed between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization in September 1993 similarly state that it is a subject for permanent status negotiations. U.S. Administrations have consistently indicated, by keeping the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv, that Jerusalem's status is unresolved.

All recent U.S. administrations have disapproved of Israel's settlement activity as prejudging final status and possibly preventing the emergence of a contiguous Palestinian state.

LOL! Sir, no offence but you are living in a dream world. There goes your theory of "certainly not US" - please don't expect us to buy your manufactured lies.

Yes and there is a argument that 9/11 was a Jews conspiracy.

It just proves you haven't read much on Israel's history - it is actually quite well known that Israel wanted extremists in power. (several israeli politicians have spoken about it too).

You have side stepped entirely, the matter at hand has nothing to do with "western states" I am only talking about the Arab-Palestiane-Pakistani population showing a equal fervor for anti-Semitic rhetoric and acting on that basis.

No, you completely missed the point I was trying to make. Please read what I said again - it was about utilising the media, not Zaid Hamid convincing palestinians.

I think the actions speak quite eloquently thank you.

Lol! So now all Palestinians support Hamas now. hehe

First full acceptance of current situation formally, next no agression pact and clear cut tone down of hamas for 5 years and other tactics. If any Arab or wannabe Arab state plays up the coalition of pro Israel west Asians subdue that. Publicly.

Then we can talk about meaningful talks.

[/quote]
Lol! Full acceptance in current situation! LOL! So basically arabs have to give up everything, Israel won't do anything - just goes to prove my point

[Surya]

seriously shyam

I understand its tough living in Stockholm but to say this

I think the debate is heading for the crux of the issue, which is should Israel have existed there. They came aboard ships because they had no where else to go - despite offers to allocate a jewish country in Australia/Uganda and some other places which the jews refused

WTF???

and how did they end up dispersed around including india?? maybe the winds took them???

[shyamd]

Okay, should Israel have existed in that location is the problem isn't it? - sure its the location of the jewish religious sites and historic israel, but was it fair to displace the people living there? That is the crux of the issue isn't it?

From the sound of things, you blame the people living there in 1947 for why jews were dispersed to different locations.

[Sanku]

I think the debate is heading for the crux of the issue, which is should Israel have existed there.

Absolutely, the debate is the crux of the issue for Palestinans Arabs and Anti-Semtics, they deny the right of Israel to exist.

There is no getting across this issue.

No one else has a problem with Israel in the current form, not India, not Russia and certainly not US. They have full relations and no sanctions whatsoever. So please dont expect any of us to buy this.

Urmm.... Okay.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_%E2 ... #Jerusalem

Wiki? And how does what ever you posted take away from the above? which was to remind you

They have full relations and no sanctions whatsoever.

Forget the issue of settlement. First accept Israel as a state. I am not asking for accepting whole of Israel. Can the Arabs do that first?

Israel has no diplomatic relations with 38 states, 20 of them members of the 22-member Arab League. Some of the countries, with which Israel has no diplomatic relations, accept Israeli passports and acknowledge other Israeli marks of sovereignty. Period of former relations marked in brackets.

You take a minor disagreement on the state of settlements and east Jerusalem as "acceptance of Israel"

Please show me Hamas accepting Israel as state.

LOL! Sir, no offence but you are living in a dream world. There goes your theory of "certainly not US" - please don't expect us to buy your manufactured lies.

Please tell me how my statement was wrong. It certainly was correct. There is a difference between accepting Israel, and accepting the current settlements and administrative status of Jerusalem.

This is the level of understanding you have?

Yes and there is a argument that 9/11 was a Jews conspiracy.

It just proves you haven't read much on Israel's history - it is actually quite well known that Israel wanted extremists in power.

Yeah right.... Sure, its all a Zionist conspiracy only. They even got Hamas to fire rockets, all their fault.

No, you completely missed the point I was trying to make. Please read what I said again - it was about utilising the media, not Zaid Hamid convincing palestinians.

Which is all chai biskoot I am ok with Chai biskoot as long as people understand its all pointless anyway.

Lol! So now all Palestinians support Hamas now. hehe

Palestinians in general support whichever is the most extereme group against Israel, have always done and continue to do so.

First full acceptance of current situation formally, next no agression pact and clear cut tone down of hamas for 5 years and other tactics. If any Arab or wannabe Arab state plays up the coalition of pro Israel west Asians subdue that. Publicly.

Then we can talk about meaningful talks.

Lol! Full acceptance in current situation! LOL! So basically arabs have to give up everything, Israel won't do anything - just goes to prove my point

So accepting Israel as state is "giving up everything?" An eloquent testimony on the Arab mindset. Accept Israel, abjure violence and restore trade. Then talk, using Pali civil noncooperation as pressure point if needed -- that is giving up everything?

It will be easier for a Pig to fly.

The matter is simple Arabs dont want Israel to exist and will use force to achieve that end, everything is till then -- Hunood.

Thank be Moses that Jews at least understand that.

[Sanku]

Okay, should Israel have existed in that location is the problem isn't it? - sure its the location of the jewish religious sites and historic israel, but was it fair to displace the people living there? That is the crux of the issue isn't it?

From the sound of things, you blame the people living there in 1947 for why jews were dispersed to different locations.

This is the Arab problem, Jews came there pushed, and were open to cooperation and cohabitation. They did not start the violence.

The Arabs first took the money from Jews and agreed to let them come in and then acted smart, too smart for their own good.

Anyway thats history

Accept Israel and let Palestinians and Israel work out the details between themselves, with status quo and no violence till no agreement is made. Let Palestinians not vote in a party which calls for destruction of Israel, that is casus belli

[shyamd]

Absolutely, the debate is the crux of the issue for Palestinans Arabs and Anti-Semtics, they deny the right of Israel to exist.

There is no getting across this issue.

They deny it in its present form. No getting across this issue. Nothing but Israeli propaganda to skew the debate that way.

Wiki? And how does what ever you posted take away from the above? which was to remind you

They have full relations and no sanctions whatsoever.

Lol, my point was does the US recognise Israel in its present shape or form? NO is the answer.

Forget the issue of settlement. First accept Israel as a state. I am not asking for accepting whole of Israel. Can the Arabs do that first?

Lol! They have done! What do you think the peace offer was for? - it explicitly accepted UN Resolution 242 i.e. israel under 1967 borders.

Did Israel implement the accords it signed with the PLO? No. Does Israel recognise the rights of the palestinian people? No. What about the displaced people from the creation of israel who are living in refugee camps in various locations? They can't go back, can't travel., can't do anything.

Israel has no diplomatic relations with 38 states, 20 of them members of the 22-member Arab League. Some of the countries, with which Israel has no diplomatic relations, accept Israeli passports and acknowledge other Israeli marks of sovereignty. Period of former relations marked in brackets.

Yeah, they accept Israeli goods too.

You take a minor disagreement on the state of settlements and east Jerusalem as "acceptance of Israel"

They are building settlements on "occupied land" according to the UN. Its minor to you, but its big for the people living there including the Israelis. And the wall that they erected which mostly annexed more palestinian land which again the US seems to have a problem with.

Please show me Hamas accepting Israel as state.

They don't accept Israel in its present state.

Please tell me how my statement was wrong. It certainly was correct. There is a difference between accepting Israel, and accepting the current settlements and administrative status of Jerusalem.

It goes back to the roots of the problem.

Yeah right.... Sure, its all a Zionist conspiracy only. They even got Hamas to fire rockets, all their fault.

You said that, not me or anyone else.

Which is all chai biskoot I am ok with Chai biskoot as long as people understand its all pointless anyway.

Yeah, I wonder why Israel bothers with AIPAC and all that.

Palestinians in general support whichever is the most extereme group against Israel, have always done and continue to do so.

That says it all - last I remembered they voted for the Fatah party in WB and Gaza up to 2006/7, which agrees with a 2 state solution (OMG Soooo extremist onleee!) - only recently since 2006/7 has Gaza supported Hamas - which even they didnt anticipate. of course its convenient to ignore local politics and governance issues.

First full acceptance of current situation formally, next no agression pact and clear cut tone down of hamas for 5 years and other tactics. If any Arab or wannabe Arab state plays up the coalition of pro Israel west Asians subdue that. Publicly.

Then we can talk about meaningful talks.

Lol! Full acceptance in current situation! LOL! So basically arabs have to give up everything, Israel won't do anything - just goes to prove my point

So accepting Israel as state is "giving up everything?" An eloquent testimony on the Arab mindset. Accept Israel, abjure violence and restore trade. Then talk, using Pali civil noncooperation as pressure point if needed -- that is giving up everything?

Urm... read your quote again. You said :"First full acceptance of current situation formally". Specifically drawing to the fact that Israel has annexed/occupied land that was designated Palestinian by the UN. Hence why I said, Arabs have to give up everything. Just shows the real nature of the Zionist supporters, let the weaker party give up everything.

[brihaspati]

shyamd,

so you also dabble in history?!!!! Now if we look at every "before", we may find someone else living there compared to "after". By that logic, west Europeans have a claim on Palestinian land too, because they lived there and ran a kingdom there for almost 200 years before the Turks and Kurds displaced them. Why not allow the Kurds to carve out a territory there - since they definitely lived there and ran a state there for some time around Salahuddin! Why stop even at that stage - since for you every Islamic claim is always justified and true (they never ever lie or deceive in your representation) - the Islamic narratives themselves describe with great glee how they displaced the Jews from the oases townships of northern Arabian peninsula. Surely then the Jews have a claim on the north of Saudi Arabia?

I did not hint anything. But the vagueness of the expressions turns out to have been useful. So now we know that you have regular contact with at least one Hamas functionary who is on-spot and high up enough within the hierarchy to give you quality intelligence. We also have come to know that you are in intimate contact with MB, and have access to a relative of the head of the MB in Syria. I also see that all this is happening from Stockholm! This is an important insight into how orgs like the MB are spreading, and how they are finding spokespersons among non-Muslims, and what are the coutries or frameworks that are providing the protective mechanisms (knowingly or unknowingly) for the spread of their ideology.

Sanku ji and others, shyamd has already provided us with the deeply illuminating concept of being "brainwashed" by organizations and "nations", and I think we can see what has happened here. He is avoiding the crucial question about the real aims of the Hamas given that his panegyrics of the Hamas throw up contradictory motivations and justifications. Those things are "mincing" words for him. He has carefully ignored the crucial element in the formal declaration of MB that "jihad is our way" does not specify that violent jihad is being excluded. By default Jihad includes violent Jihad, and a careful counting of the instances and context of Jihad in any of the more popular or standard Hadith collections overwhelmingly associate Jihad with violence. Shyamd even is ready to raise the question of whether Israel has a right to exist or not.

It is a good thing that at least one blindly devoted justifier of Islamism has come forward and exposed himself. I think it helps the rest of us to be more alert about how and where the Jihadis (MB is self declared Jihadi by their slogan) are trying to enter Indian society and create spaces of sympathy and support for their long term expansionist agenda.

Thanks again Shyamd, for adding this aspect of Islamist propaganda aimed at Indians on my watchlist. I have already put forward my concerns to a policy research group that studies such things for Europe. Hopefully we will be able to gather sufficient material for this before our next meeting. Over the last two days, I have had some revealing discussions with "experts", and one of them has also sent me on-going material on how Islamists are trying to spread their networks in northern Europe. Apparently, expats from countries crucial to Islamist interests who are in NE for professional or academic/studies reasons, are good targets.

I think that the essential points of debate between you and me are quite clear, and we will never agree on the future course of action. I am confident that long term, Islamism will be removed from earth. You always equate "removal" with "genocide" because that is what Islamism understands. Its different for me. Moreover, in the future Indians will support Israel unequivocally, for the very reasons that you support MB or Hamas. So maybe you should let your Hamas or MB contacts know that such propaganda may actually backfire and that they should choose their spokespersons more carefully in the future!

[Pranav]

Israel Palestine is a complicated issue. Factions like Hamas have an extremist mindset. And although there has been fruitful cooperation between Israel and India, Israel is also inextricably tied up with western elites that have been causing many troubles for India and around the world.

But one is happy to support Israel as a nation, if Palestinian non-combatants are not made to suffer unduly.

One possible way forward - Hamas should announce conditional recognition for Israel (subject to final status being agreed upon), and be open to something less than "right of return". And Israel should stop trying to undermine Palestinians - after all Hamas started with Israeli support, as a way to counter Arafat. Final status of the Temple Mount will be most intractable issue. I would say that the Jews have a greater claim on it.

[RamaY]

Temple Mount must go to Israel. Islam has to learn to respect other religions and faiths. Desecration cannot be an acceptable practice to overwrite local religious sites/symbols.

[Gagan]

Again the issue here is that the Palestinians and the arabs have a schooling system (or not) that imbibes hatered and extremist views against israel and the jews.
This translates into issues such as the arabs not accepting the right of israel and the jews to survive.
This line of thought is clearly wrong and can not be condoned.

I don't think that the Israeli education system breeds that kind of hatred for the arabs. There would be awareness of the history of the wars that israel has had with its neighbours, and that extent, building awareness and a sense of nationalism is vital to israel's very survival in the very difficult neighbourhood that it lives in.

[chaanakya]

Temple Mount must go to Israel. Islam has to learn to respect other religions and faiths. Desecration cannot be an acceptable practice to overwrite local religious sites/symbols.

Thats equally applicable to many religious structures in India

[shyamd]

shyamd,

so you also dabble in history?!!!! Now if we look at every "before", we may find someone else living there compared to "after". By that logic, west Europeans have a claim on Palestinian land too, because they lived there and ran a kingdom there for almost 200 years before the Turks and Kurds displaced them. Why not allow the Kurds to carve out a territory there - since they definitely lived there and ran a state there for some time around Salahuddin!

Urmm... So, is it fair for the Palestinians who lived there at the time to be kicked out? Answer that question because thats the crux of the issue.

So, by this definition, if I built a house and lets say after 10 years, I sold it. I can reclaim it after 40 years if I have nowhere to live (despite the government offering to give me housing)? thanks man, I wish that was possible.

Why stop even at that stage - since for you every Islamic claim is always justified and true (they never ever lie or deceive in your representation) - the Islamic narratives themselves describe with great glee how they displaced the Jews from the oases townships of northern Arabian peninsula. Surely then the Jews have a claim on the north of Saudi Arabia?

Yeah, thats why they talk about Greater zion which stretches upto the euphrates. So that means I have to support every Israeli/Zionist claim (they never lie or deceive your representation)?

I did not hint anything. But the vagueness of the expressions turns out to have been useful.

Lol. I don't need to say anything further. My post made it pretty clear what you were hinting at. We'll let the reader decide.

So now we know that you have regular contact with at least one Hamas functionary who is on-spot and high up enough within the hierarchy to give you quality intelligence.

Mate, I have openly said so for the last 3 years, even during the Gaza war, I gave a breakdown of what their side were thinking. But please don't confuse their opinion with MY opinion.

We also have come to know that you are in intimate contact with MB, and have access to a relative of the head of the MB in Syria.

Umm.... yeah and..... I have said so openly for a while. There is nothing that happened "Now" per se.

I also see that all this is happening from Stockholm! This is an important insight into how orgs like the MB are spreading, and how they are finding spokespersons among non-Muslims, and what are the coutries or frameworks that are providing the protective mechanisms (knowingly or unknowingly) for the spread of their ideology.

Lol! let me just switch those words:

This is an important insight into how zionists are spreading, and how they are finding spokespersons among non-jews, and what are the coutries or frameworks that are providing the protective mechanisms (knowingly or unknowingly) for the spread of their ideology. - More evidence(soo many documentaries/reports from western sources, reports on israeli spying activity by the US etc) of this, than your claim (I am sure most readers, including strategic analysts have heard about Israeli/Zionist PR machines) about MB spreading non-muslim spokesmen.

Sanku ji and others, shyamd has already provided us with the deeply illuminating concept of being "brainwashed" by organizations and "nations", and I think we can see what has happened here. He is avoiding the crucial question about the real aims of the Hamas given that his panegyrics of the Hamas throw up contradictory motivations and justifications.

Oh yeah .... lol! Show some examples mate.

Those things are "mincing" words for him. He has carefully ignored the crucial element in the formal declaration of MB that "jihad is our way" does not specify that violent jihad is being excluded.

Okay, so lets just check if its true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood
The Brotherhood's stated goal is to instill the Qur'an and Sunnah as the "sole reference point for ... ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community ... and state".[2] Since its inception in 1928 the movement has officially opposed violent means to achieve its goals,[3][4] with some exceptions such as in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or to overthrow secular Ba'athist rule in Syria (see Hama massacre).

Further states:
Its position on violence has also caused disputes within the movement, with advocates of violence at times breaking away to form groups such as the Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (The Islamic Group) and Al Takfir Wal Hijra (Excommunication and Migration).[14]

However, once Al Qaeda was fully organized, they denounced the Muslim Brotherhood's reform through nonviolence and accused them of "betraying the cause of Islam and abandoning their 'jihad' in favour of forming political parties and supporting modern state institutions".[17][18]

So Jihad is our way - oh are you still using that "apparent" reference to MB from the US which in the end conceded "However, none of these documents cited any quotes or materials from the Muslim Brotherhood to support the said allegations." How convenient to miss out.

By default Jihad includes violent Jihad, and a careful counting of the instances and context of Jihad in any of the more popular or standard Hadith collections overwhelmingly associate Jihad with violence.

Wow, so you now tell muslims what to believe. Excellent.

Shyamd even is ready to raise the question of whether Israel has a right to exist or not.

I love the way you twist what I am saying and purposely choose to ignore what clarifications I have said, just to try and paint me as an islamist - I think readers understand how desperate you are. Besides, this was raised by Surya, and I have clarified what I meant.

It is a good thing that at least one blindly devoted justifier of Islamism has come forward and exposed himself.

I must be a "devoted justifier of islamism" now if I support the other viewpoint. Okay okay, I must support all Israeli viewpoints now, to stop being called those names.

I think it helps the rest of us to be more alert about how and where the Jihadis (MB is self declared Jihadi by their slogan) are trying to enter Indian society and create spaces of sympathy and support for their long term expansionist agenda.

Your terrible arguments just exposed how bad the zionist supporters are at raising points - Anyone who questions the zionist viewpoint is branded a "blindly devoted justifier of Islamism". Oh and just look back at my posts there is a lot of evidence there to back up what I say.

Thanks again Shyamd

Oh no Brihaspatiji, Thank you!

,

for adding this aspect of Islamist propaganda aimed at Indians on my watchlist. I have already put forward my concerns to a policy research group that studies such things for Europe. Hopefully we will be able to gather sufficient material for this before our next meeting. Over the last two days, I have had some revealing discussions with "experts", and one of them has also sent me on-going material on how Islamists are trying to spread their networks in northern Europe. Apparently, expats from countries crucial to Islamist interests who are in NE for professional or academic/studies reasons, are good targets.

Glad you have put forward your concerns, I look forward to the results. Do tell us the dates of when results will be published etc and where we can find them. I'd love to hear more about it. Thanks in Advance.

I think that the essential points of debate between you and me are quite clear, and we will never agree on the future course of action.

Perhaps. I think the problem was not what I as a person think, but based on facts and viewpoints of the others.

I have made my views on the Indian future course of action - continue strong ties with Israel. Please provide me with a quote on the contrary on future course of action if that is the point that you are trying to make - Thanks.

I am confident that long term, Islamism will be removed from earth.

I hope the AQ, Taleban, AQ in Iraq etc are removed too.

You always equate "removal" with "genocide" because that is what Islamism understands. Its different for me.

I think everyone understood what your statement was earlier. I explained that quite clearly what you were hinting at.

Moreover, in the future Indians will support Israel unequivocally, for the very reasons that you support MB or Hamas.

Maybe - depends on what happens on the future you see. Right now the relationship is driven less by ideological leanings(although there are some parallels) but more on "they need us, we need them" type thing.

[Surya]

Okay, should Israel have existed in that location is the problem isn't it? - sure its the location of the jewish religious sites and historic israel, but was it fair to displace the people living there? That is the crux of the issue isn't it?

From the sound of things, you blame the people living there in 1947 for why jews were dispersed to different locations.

Not really - but in attacking the Israelis as soon as they were being formed they opened up the doors to a 'might is right" battle.

The Israelis bought land of the arabs initially - but the fighting did not start till the Arabs started attacking them. Once that happened - it becomes a mess.


Its not like the Israelis captured all this in 47.

Each Arab attack led to a riposte with the Arabs loosing land.

So we are down to a fundamental question what do you expect the israelis to do? Give up everything and go to an island in the sea??

The real start of a solution is the merger of jordan with west bank to create a viable palestinian state. gaza can fold back into Egypt and any fellow who wants a Palestinian Identity can always move to the newly created palestine out of Jordan and West bank.

Now take that to your Arab friends and discuss that.

[Carl_T]

The real solution is for the arab states to accept palestinian refugees just like Israel did with jewish refugees. Big chance, I know.

[Surya]

Yeah, thats why they talk about Greater zion which stretches upto the euphrates. So that means I have to support every Israeli/Zionist claim (they never lie or deceive your representation)?

Err lets not bring the extreme lunatic fringe to be representative of Israel.

This lunatic fringe which wantes greater israel - does not even recognise the State of Israel - only a divine power.

If the Arabs vanish tomorrow - the secular Israelis have to deal with these nut jobs.

[Sanku]

Absolutely, the debate is the crux of the issue for Palestinans Arabs and Anti-Semtics, they deny the right of Israel to exist.

There is no getting across this issue.

They deny it in its present form. No getting across this issue. Nothing but Israeli propaganda to skew the debate that way.

Sir, they have NO diplomatic links whatsoever with Israel, call for death of Jews and destruction of Israel and regular intervals, have trade sanctions and restrictions on movement of people.

This is not lack acceptance in current form, this lack of acceptance in ANY form.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_re ... _of_Israel

The following UN member states do not recognize Israel as a state:[11]Afghanistan,[12] Algeria,[13] Bahrain,[14] Bangladesh,[15] Chad,[16] Cuba, Indonesia, Iran,[17] Iraq,[18] Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya,[19] Malaysia, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, United Arab Emirates[20] and Yemen.

Just what is so hard here that you have trouble wrapping your mind around it?

Lol, my point was does the US recognise Israel in its present shape or form? NO is the answer.

Yes it does, and you are severly challenged in your basic understanding of international relations.

Does India recognize China? Yes

Does is accept ALL CHINESE TERRITORIAL CLAIMS? No

The above is what not accepting the current form means, which is the same as between Israel and US.

Lol! They have done! What do you think the peace offer was for? - it explicitly accepted UN Resolution 242 i.e. israel under 1967 borders.

Yeah, some peace deal. We will fight with you to kill you, but after we get our asses handed back to us, we want you to return the land we lost as well.

Scum is too good a word for these people.

Shyamd -- give up -- you are clearly too besotted by the Arab position to see the truth -- that Arab attitude towards Israel is
1) We want to kill you all by force and throw you into sea
2) Since we are too useless to do that you keep defeating us, we pretend to hide behind international opinion.
3) But under no cost will we deal with you as equals, as in equal states talking to each other.

That is it -- and given their past bloodthirsty, anti-semtic, barbaric history, the LEAST Arabs can do is

1) recognize Israel as a state now
2) agree to abjure violence as a means for settlement
3) discuss peacefully the solution.

I see you find these three very basic conditions difficult to fathom -- I understand -- given that your friends are people whose credo in life is "no Israel" its not tough to see why you feel that way.

Our positions are irreconcilable.

[Sanku]

The real solution is for the arab states to accept palestinian refugees just like Israel did with jewish refugees. Big chance, I know.

Right pigs will fly first, all Arabs want is a destruction of Israel, plain and simple.

[Sanku]

Israel Palestine is a complicated issue..

Its not. Its simple. Three steps

1) Accept Israel
2) Abjure violence
3) talk.

[Sanku]

Sanku ji and others, shyamd has already provided us with the deeply illuminating concept of being "brainwashed" by organizations and "nations", and I think we can see what has happened here.

I see that Mahodaya, I see that.

[Altair]

Iran announces aid ships to Gaza

Iran on Monday announced it was sending two ship loads of aid into Gaza later this week and asserted that its Navy was ready to escort vessels wanting to deliver humanitarian assistance to residents of the besieged coastal strip.

“If the respected leader of the revolution gives an order in this regard, the Revolutionary Guards’ naval forces will take a practical step using their capability and equipment to escort flotillas to Gaza,” Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei's advisor in the IRGC naval wing, Ali Shirazi, told Mehr news agency on Sunday.

Analysts say dispatch of Iranian ships to Gaza, especially under a naval escort, is bound to surge tensions between Iran and Israel and rivet international attention to this explosive development.

[Carl_T]

^^^
Time to grab popcorn.

[Venkarl]

Shyamji...I am great fan of your posts in Pictures thread...no offense meant...to me Israeli Arab conflict is smaller than friction between Israel and World....right from the times of Samaria and Judah's fall...Jews were driven away from place to place till re-formation of a state for jews....anyways..when I analyze their entire history...like in Telugu they say...lock up yourself beating a cat with a stick in a room for long time...there would be a time for cat to fight back against you....only analogy I draw is that the Man is World today, stick being Islam and cat's a Jew....

what man needs to do is...break the stick and tame the canine. {kidding...shelve the stick and humane treatment to cat}

please don't switch words like you did earlier in some post....lets look at it from a broader perspective...Islam is a problem...we might find liberal/friendly muslims....but problem is not them...it is the tenets of Islam which says love and compassion towards believers and hate and venom for kufrs....sorry...I am not surprised seeing most disagreeing with your POV.

[brihaspati]

Urmm... So, is it fair for the Palestinians who lived there at the time to be kicked out? Answer that question because thats the crux of the issue. So, by this definition, if I built a house and lets say after 10 years, I sold it. I can reclaim it after 40 years if I have nowhere to live (despite the government offering to give me housing)? thanks man, I wish that was possible.

Quote:
Why stop even at that stage - since for you every Islamic claim is always justified and true (they never ever lie or deceive in your representation) - the Islamic narratives themselves describe with great glee how they displaced the Jews from the oases townships of northern Arabian peninsula. Surely then the Jews have a claim on the north of Saudi Arabia?

Yeah, thats why they talk about Greater zion which stretches upto the euphrates. So that means I have to support every Israeli/Zionist claim (they never lie or deceive your representation)?

Who really sold the land to the Palestinians? For your comparison, then, are you saying that the Israelis "sold" the rights to their land to the "Palestinians"? "Gov" offering housing!!! which gov offered an alternative homeland to the Jews? Those who were living there before 48 - how exactly did they "buy" the land? Moreover, is it okay to imply that - even for arguments sake - Jews were resident in the area and owned the land, for only then could they have "sold" it!

I have not quoted Jewish or Judaic sources. The claims about ethnic cleansing of Jews of the northern parts of the peninsula is laid out in Tabari, Ishaq, Bukhari - solid Islamic narratives, do you want me to quote from there?

Quote:
Those things are "mincing" words for him. He has carefully ignored the crucial element in the formal declaration of MB that "jihad is our way" does not specify that violent jihad is being excluded.

Okay, so lets just check if its true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood
The Brotherhood's stated goal is to instill the Qur'an and Sunnah as the "sole reference point for ... ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community ... and state".[2] Since its inception in 1928 the movement has officially opposed violent means to achieve its goals,[3][4] with some exceptions such as in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or to overthrow secular Ba'athist rule in Syria (see Hama massacre).

Further states:
Its position on violence has also caused disputes within the movement, with advocates of violence at times breaking away to form groups such as the Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (The Islamic Group) and Al Takfir Wal Hijra (Excommunication and Migration).[14]

However, once Al Qaeda was fully organized, they denounced the Muslim Brotherhood's reform through nonviolence and accused them of "betraying the cause of Islam and abandoning their 'jihad' in favour of forming political parties and supporting modern state institutions".[17][18]

So Jihad is our way - oh are you still using that "apparent" reference to MB from the US which in the end conceded "However, none of these documents cited any quotes or materials from the Muslim Brotherhood to support the said allegations." How convenient to miss out.

I actually quoted very briefly from material forwarded to me and not from wiki. Sicne you are so concerned about not quoting more, lets have it from wiki again :

The general goals and strategic plans of the MB are only found in Arabic documents. One for Europe called "The Project" was found in 2001 in Switzerland, another for North America was found in 2005 called the "General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America."[25] An evaluation of this Memorandum was made for the US-Congress and for the Pentagon.[26] Their influence is fast growing, especially in Europe, but not easy to trace while the active members have to keep their membership secret.

One citation from the document "General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America"[27] makes the objectives of the MB clear: "The process of settlement is a 'Civilization-Jihadist Process' with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."
[edit] Main Activity-plan

The main goals on mid-term as approved by the Executive office and the Shura Council are formulated in a 5-year action plan derived from transcripts:[28]
[edit] Primary goals

* reinstatement of the caliphate and reunite the "dar el Islam."
* Strengthening the internal structure
* Administrative discipline
* Recruitment and settlement of the Dawa'a
* Energizing the organisations work
* Energizing political work fronts (e.g. in civil political organisations)

[edit] Secondary goals

* Finance and Investment
* Foreign relations
* Reviving Woman's activity
* Political awareness to the members of the Group
* Securing the group (To find out if they are being monitored, and if, how they can get rid of them)
* Dawa'ah (the lecture/speech of religion)
* Media (influencing of and infiltration in the media)
* Taking advantage of human potentials (e.g. infiltration in education, civil organisations)

I believe Wiki refers to the govrenment transcript submission/exhibit linked to reference item 28 on the wiki page. The pdf file of the transcript does mention Muslim Brotherhood. Of course, it is up to the "believers" to take this as a fabrication or not.

Quote:
By default Jihad includes violent Jihad, and a careful counting of the instances and context of Jihad in any of the more popular or standard Hadith collections overwhelmingly associate Jihad with violence.

Wow, so you now tell muslims what to believe. Excellent.

I do not tell Muslims anything to believe (at least not yet). I can provide the major interpretations and statements about Jihad from the narratives and Islamic law interpreters themselves.

[brihaspati]

http://globalmbreport.org/?p=2672
This is one of the sites with useful articles and a "watch" on Muslim Brotherhood. This particular page brings up the significance of WAMY (World Association of Muslim Youth), and its connections to "Kashmiri" Jihadis, and the Muslim Brotherthood which was a key behind the foundation of WAMY.

[ramana]

Brihaspatiji, What the Islamist loss to Eurpoean Colonial powers did was to bring back the worst of Islamism that had been suppresed during the march in time. As Islam conquered new areas, it lost most of its unsavory practices in order to retain the conquests.
I do not deny that what you quote is inherent in Islam but in the long centuries it was suppressed and a moderation was underway. This moderation got defeated along with political power and the so called reversal is really a reaction to this defeat.

[shyamd]

The Israelis bought land of the arabs initially - but the fighting did not start till the Arabs started attacking them. Once that happened - it becomes a mess.

I agree, the jewish agency did buy land - but not gigantic amounts. Why did arabs rise up? We need to look into that - as far as I am aware (I may be wrong ), the arabs revolted due to poor economic circumstances, problems with the British and then the final was a call for a jewish state there where majority of people were arab palestinians - I think there was a white paper on it, then there was some agreement with the League of Nations as it was, to create a jewish home in Palestine.

Its not like the Israelis captured all this in 47.

Each Arab attack led to a riposte with the Arabs loosing land.

Correct, hence why arabs have accepted completely israel's right to exist in the 1967 borders. What was that responded to by Israel? Words and more settlements - they didn't come out and say we will give xyz for complete peace. Ariel Sharon knew that and he took the first step of the withdrawal of Gaza.

So we are down to a fundamental question what do you expect the israelis to do? Give up everything and go to an island in the sea??

The arabs wish them to go back to 1967 borders.

The real start of a solution is the merger of jordan with west bank to create a viable palestinian state. gaza can fold back into Egypt and any fellow who wants a Palestinian Identity can always move to the newly created palestine out of Jordan and West bank.

I agree.

[brihaspati]

http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4254.htm
Appointed in mid-January 2010 as the new general guide of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Dr. Muhammad Badi:

"Islam … Advocates Jihad as the Only Means for Setting the Ummah's Situation Aright"

In a sermon, Badi' called upon Muslim leaders to pursue the way of jihad: "In Islam, a leader is granted lofty status due to his important position in the service of his nation... but this is on the condition that he act in justice, responsibility, and good faith toward his people... Do the leaders of the Ummah need to be reminded that Islam obligates them to thoroughly prepare the Ummah to respond to the offensives it faces, one after another without abatement? Do the leaders of the Ummah need to be reminded that its nations are prey to occupation and hegemony [and are pawns] in a disgraceful game, which is part of the American-Zionist plan and which degrades us on all fronts? Do the leaders of the Ummah need help comprehending that it is their duty to stand behind the Al-Aqsa Mosque and to defend the Islamic holy places, before it is too late?...
[Now exactly what constitutes "offence" against Islam? Any criticism? Verbal opposition? Right to object to Islamic practises found unacceptable by a non-Muslim community? ]
[...]
It is within the ability of the leaders of 'an Ummah designated by Allah for mightiness,' to rescue from the Zionists' jails the female Muslim prisoners who are screaming, crying out for someone to put an end to their humiliation...

"Muslim leaders, Islam, to which you belong, advocates jihad as the only means for setting the Ummah's situation aright, as Allah says: 'O you believers! When you are told to go forth in Allah's way, why should you incline heavily to earth? Are you contented with this world's life instead of the hereafter?' [Koran 9:38] Our revival, majesty, and glory depend on the return to righteousness, which will only be achieved through resistance and the support of [resistance] in every way – with money, arms, information, and self[-sacrifice]..."

Revoke the Camp David Accords

"It is your obligation to stop the absurd negotiations, whether direct or indirect, and to support all forms of resistance for the sake of liberating every occupied piece of land in Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, and all [other] parts of our Muslim world. The sources of your authority, as all religious scholars have agreed, are the Koran and the Sunna, and not U.N. resolutions or the dictates of the Zionists or Americans. This can be achieved if you declare the Palestine cause and the causes of the [other] occupied Islamic nations your primary concern. You must stand behind your free peoples and their various institutions in their repeated calls for boycotts, an end to normalization, and support for the resistance and its representatives... You must revoke all the agreements of capitulation.... especially the Camp David Accords... which go against the Egyptian constitution and U.N. resolutions, and do not therefore obligate Egyptian senior officials..."[2]

In an interview for the Muslim Brotherhood's official website, Badi' said: "We believe that the way to resolve the Palestinian problem is through resistance, and that there can be no [concessions] regarding the Palestinians' rights vis-à-vis Jerusalem, the borders, and the right of return..."[3] In another sermon, Badi' made clear that armed resistance is legitimate: "There is nothing for the Palestinians, the Arabs, or the Muslim Ummah as a whole but resistance by all legitimate means, and this includes armed resistance. This is the most effective way of dealing with the Zionist tyranny that is supported or silently tolerated by the West and the [rest of] the world."[4]

"The Prophet Muhammad brought us Tidings that a Decisive War would Break Out Between the Jews and the Muslims, and the Muslims and Islam would Emerge Victorious"

In a televised interview,[5] Badi' explained that the Muslim Brotherhood's crest of two swords and a Koran was chosen by the organization's founder, Hassan Al-Bana, as a symbol of jihad against the Zionists in Palestine and the British in Egypt, and that it continued to represent the struggle against anyone who threatened Islam. Badi' stressed that the Muslim Brotherhood is not a violent organization – that its members would not take up arms against other Muslims or against non-combatants, but only against the enemies of Allah, as they did when the movement took part in the defense of Palestine in the 1948 war. He added: "We will continue to raise the banner of jihad – two swords and a Koran – as long as the Zionists raise their flag, with two blue stripes to represent their so-called state [reaching] from the Nile to the Euphrates. And the [Muslim] brotherhood will continue to view the Jews and Zionists as their first and foremost enemies."[6]
[He now includes not only Zionists but also Jews as enemies. Neither does he consider them unique as enemies - just teh first and foremost among others ]

In one of his weekly sermons, Badi' even called for the abrogation of the peace agreement between Egypt and Israel: "Did the wars with the Zionists end, as Sadat said when he declared in the Zionist Knesset, 'Tell your children that the October War was the last war?' Did the peace agreement realize the hopes of the Ummah or was it a foul and counterfeit peace based on concessions? Would revising or even nullifying the agreement be tantamount to declaring war? After all, the Zionist entity violated all of its commitments and never honored a single agreement, yet [nobody has accused it of] declaring war...
[...]

In another sermon, Badi' said: "...Fighting for it and defending it is an obligation, and abandoning it is a sin. Gestures of kindness toward the Zionists and their allies, and maintaining relations with them are [tantamount to] a war against Allah, His religion, and the Muslims... Jihad for the restoration of Palestine and Al-Aqsa is an individual duty incumbent upon every Muslim. Everyone is required to defend the holy places – and especially Jerusalem – and to protect them...."

The sermon continued: "The Prophet Muhammad brought us the tidings that a decisive war would break out between the Jews and the Muslims, and that the Muslims and Islam would emerge victorious. This prophecy is what gives us hope. Thus said the Prophet Muhammad [in a hadith]: 'Before Judgment Day arrives, the Muslims will fight the Jews and kill them, until the Jews hide behind stones and trees. The stones or the trees will say: 'Oh Muslim! Oh servant of Allah! There is a Jew behind me, come and kill him' – except for the Gharqad tree [which will not betray Jews who hide behind it], for it is the tree of the Jews.' Therefore, we say that Israel is bound for perdition, whereas Al-Aqsa will remain as long as the world endures..."[8]

"The Hour is Near when [We will] Rid the Ummah of this Foreign Body [Israel] that has been Malevolently Planted in Its Midst"

Badi' continued in this vein in another Friday sermon: "The truth of the matter is that the Zionists are too wretched and weak to be an invincible power as they, or the defeatist in spirit among us, are trying to claim. For the honorable Koran described these cowards clearly: 'Ignominy shall be their portion wherever they are found, unless [they grasp] a rope from Allah and a rope from men' [Koran 3:112]... The Zionists' [current] superiority is temporary and an anomaly. Left to themselves, without the 'rope from men,' they would return to the baseness and wretchedness that is part of their nature. They have not defeated our Ummah thanks to any inherent strength of their own, and they would not succeed [at all] were it not for our weakness and laxity...

"What has been done, and is still being done to the Zionist enemy by the [spiritual] descendents of [Hassan] Al-Bana [founder of the Muslim Brotherhood] and of [famous Palestinian fighters 'Izz Al-Din] Al-Qassam, [Ahmad] Yassin, and ['Abd Al-'Aziz] Al-Rantisi, and by all the pure and righteous resistance forces, is one of the most important signs that [the Zionists'] superiority is ending, and that the claims about the invincible strength of the Zionist entity are false...

"There is no doubt that the dawn of victory is coming, and that the hour is near when [we will] rid the Ummah of this foreign body that has been malevolently planted in its midst... [especially] since [the events in] South Lebanon and Gaza have revealed the Zionist tiger to be a paper tiger. But we must... support the suicide operations of the young jihadists in Palestine, attacks that have cause the Zionists to quake in fear and lose sleep, until their hearts have melted with fright. Behold, the Zionists are retreating, and the truth is pressing on... It is a holy duty to support the citizens of Jerusalem with money, equipment, and in any [other] way, [but] not through normalization with the Zionist enemy or attempts to grovel to it..."[9]

[shyamd]

Err lets not bring the extreme lunatic fringe to be representative of Israel.

This lunatic fringe which wantes greater israel - does not even recognise the State of Israel - only a divine power.

If the Arabs vanish tomorrow - the secular Israelis have to deal with these nut jobs.

I agree but, some past prime ministers of Israel are known supporters of Greater Israel. But now its probably watered down to West Bank settlements.

[Carl_T]

Why must there be a Palestinian state? The Palestinians have no history of being a nation, why not just a part of Jordan?

Anyways once this palestinian state is established, we can watch the Islamist anger dissipate and turn on the Arabs themselves.

[brihaspati]

Brihaspatiji, What the Islamist loss to Eurpoean Colonial powers did was to bring back the worst of Islamism that had been suppresed during the march in time. As Islam conquered new areas, it lost most of its unsavory practices in order to retain the conquests.
I do not deny that what you quote is inherent in Islam but in the long centuries it was suppressed and a moderation was underway. This moderation got defeated along with political power and the so called reversal is really a reaction to this defeat.

I also thought so for a long time. Then I realized that a lot of the representations of "moderation" or "compromises" were actually a selection of narratives under the British and German fight over how to represent Islam. The Brits hated the Ottomans and upped the Arabs. The Germans took up nosing around with the Ottomans and took up upping them. In the process, and especially post WWI - the contrarian researchers like Margoulis are carefully allowed to slip out of the "public" academics.

Delving down, none of the horrors decrease in any manner. We find narratives being written down in the 13th to the 17th century that show no decrease at all. Suddenly in the era or European colonial success we begin to find selective "whitewashing" (simply not bringing forward the "horrible") in the versions meant for public consumption. There are open acknowledgments from the translators that they find it impossible for their "tastes".

Just like in India, the non-translation and editing out of the more "horrible" stuff creates the impression that the "horror" went down as time passed.

[shyamd]

Sir, they have NO diplomatic links whatsoever with Israel, call for death of Jews and destruction of Israel and regular intervals, have trade sanctions and restrictions on movement of people.

This is not lack acceptance in current form, this lack of acceptance in ANY form.

No diplomatic links??

Israeli delegation visits Oman: official

Rabin Visits Oman, Taking Step To Widen Link to Gulf Region

At an airport news conference after his return, Mr. Rabin said he had gone to Muscat, the capital of Oman, at the invitation of the country's ruler, Sultan Qabus bin Said. "The purpose was to strengthen, to give backing for the continuation of the peace process," Mr. Rabin said.......

"Another Arab state in another part of the Arab world has granted de facto recognition to Israel," Mr. Sheves said. "The code that an Israeli Prime Minister cannot visit an Arab state that has not signed a peace treaty was broken."

.

Israel-Qatar relations warming

Qatari foreign minister says his country may establish official relations with Jerusalem before establishment of a Palestinian state
Attila Somfalvi, New York
Published: 09.15.05, 20:41 / Israel News
Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom has met with Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jasam al-Ta'ani, at the U.N. headquarters in New York.

Qatar said Thursday that it is contemplating the establishment of open diplomatic relations with Israel before the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The Gulf country's stance is different to that of Pakistan, which has said that while it is interested in developing relations with Israel, is holding off on a formal relationship until a Palestinian state comes into existence.

Shalom meets with his Qatari counterpart (Photo: Shahar Azran)

Israeli diplomatic sources have said the meeting, which was filmed and photographed, expresses a wish to advance relations between the two countries, and represents a "psychological breakthrough."
.....................
In the course of the meeting, Shalom said "for two years now, I have been meeting continuously with Arab leaders in secret. I very much hope that we will take a step forward."

There are more where that came from. Anyway, the comprehensive arab peace plan in 2002, which confirmed Israel's right to exist in 1967 borders, was met by more settlement expansion and just some words. So Arabs have confirmed that Israel has a right to exist, but disagrees with borders post 1967.

Yes it does, and you are severly challenged in your basic understanding of international relations.

Does India recognize China? Yes

Does is accept ALL CHINESE TERRITORIAL CLAIMS? No

Answered that question above.

Yeah, some peace deal. We will fight with you to kill you, but after we get our asses handed back to us, we want you to return the land we lost as well.

After 1967?? Explain please.

Shyamd -- give up -- you are clearly too besotted by the Arab position to see the truth -- that Arab attitude towards Israel is
1) We want to kill you all by force and throw you into sea
2) Since we are too useless to do that you keep defeating us, we pretend to hide behind international opinion.
3) But under no cost will we deal with you as equals, as in equal states talking to each other.

I think you are sometimes confusing the arab opinion with Hamas's opinion. Please differentiate both.

Point number 1 - Urmm.... they accepted israel in 1967 borders. So thats rubbish. Next..
Point number 2 & 3 - more rhetoric which doesnt require a response.

Oh please, your mind is too besotted with the Israeli position to see the truth - the israeli attitude is -
1) Give up the whole of palestine i.e. we want all of israel -
2) to that end we will build settlements and annexe your land (Wall has been declared illegal by the ICJ in the Hague - backed by the UN general assembly asking Israel to remove the illegal wall.
3) We don't recognise you as equals - Israel doesn't recognise the right of palestinians and palestine to exist - a fact proven by increase in settlements and Barak Obama's speech: Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's.

In May and June 2009, President Barack Obama said "The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements,"[83] and the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton stated that the President "wants to see a stop to settlements — not some settlements, not outposts, not ‘natural growth’ exceptions.”[84]

That is it -- and given their past bloodthirsty, anti-semtic, barbaric history, the LEAST Arabs can do is

1) recognize Israel as a state now
2) agree to abjure violence as a means for settlement
3) discuss peacefully the solution.

Point 1 - No, that is tantamount to accepting the annexation of the lands, and voids resolution 242, so what is Israel willing to give up or give?
Point 2 - Abjure violence eh, didn't Hamas and Israel have an agreement which was repeatedly broken by Israel? Okay we discussed that before anyway. Beside, Hamas does not represent the Arab League's position.
Point 3 - Discuss peacefully? So wtf was that comprehensive peace initiative then? Did israel come forward for negotiation? err NO!

Please do watch Ehud barak's interview with Charlie Rose, he sums it up nicely their attitude - Both sides are going to have a tough time to convince certain people about peace as both sides have people who are against peace.

I see you find these three very basic conditions difficult to fathom -- I understand -- given that your friends are people whose credo in life is "no Israel" its not tough to see why you feel that way.

Repeating Israeli propaganda, Arabs have accepted Israel's right to exist in the 2002 peace plan. So please spare us the propaganda. I wish Israel could meet one simple thing: come forward for negotiation with the Arab league.

[Surya]

Ok shyam so now we are getting somewhere

i agree about 67 borders but the Arabs also want "right to return'.

[shyamd]

Urmm... So, is it fair for the Palestinians who lived there at the time to be kicked out? Answer that question because thats the crux of the issue. So, by this definition, if I built a house and lets say after 10 years, I sold it. I can reclaim it after 40 years if I have nowhere to live (despite the government offering to give me housing)? thanks man, I wish that was possible.

Quote:
Why stop even at that stage - since for you every Islamic claim is always justified and true (they never ever lie or deceive in your representation) - the Islamic narratives themselves describe with great glee how they displaced the Jews from the oases townships of northern Arabian peninsula. Surely then the Jews have a claim on the north of Saudi Arabia?

Yeah, thats why they talk about Greater zion which stretches upto the euphrates. So that means I have to support every Israeli/Zionist claim (they never lie or deceive your representation)?

Who really sold the land to the Palestinians? For your comparison, then, are you saying that the Israelis "sold" the rights to their land to the "Palestinians"?

Didn't the christians expel the jews first in israel? Then the Babylonians conquered Judah - expelled them to babylon. Then went to Roman rule - Byzantine - Persians (fought together with the Jews and then expelled the jews) - Arab rule (jewish population dwindled even further due to taxation) - Crusaders (killed more jews left or sold them as slaves) - Muslim army's back (give jews some freedom, so some return) - Ottomon (slowly more jews come from russia/eastern europe) - British.

Okay, so who kicked the Israeli's out? there was a lot of people responsible for it - so you want to make history right by kicking out the people who lived there during 1948? Answer that for me.

I am trying to say, I owned land, kicked out for whatever reason, house is sold on to numerous people over the years, after 80 years, I decide to come back(because of my personal circumstances) and say I used to live there, get out of my property. Is that fair to the guy who bought the house to be kicked out after many years and confined to one small room out of the house?

"Gov" offering housing!!! which gov offered an alternative homeland to the Jews?

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... ganda.html

Which government? You know the British one. The link also confirms: The Uganda Program was finally rejected by the Zionist movement at the Seventh Zionist Congress in 1905... Zangwill turned his attention to settlement in Canada and Australia. But opposition from local residents led him to abandon the scheme. Expeditions were sent to Mesopotamia (Iraq), Cyrenaica (Libya) and Angola but little came of these expeditions.

I honestly wonder if you should be debating because you are really terrible at this - you seem extremely ill-informed, I am afraid.

I have not quoted Jewish or Judaic sources. The claims about ethnic cleansing of Jews of the northern parts of the peninsula is laid out in Tabari, Ishaq, Bukhari - solid Islamic narratives, do you want me to quote from there?

So what are you saying? lets kick out the saudi's who live there because the jews used to live there and they were ethnically cleansed by their ancestors.

I actually quoted very briefly from material forwarded to me and not from wiki. Sicne you are so concerned about not quoting more, lets have it from wiki again :

The general goals and strategic plans of the MB are only found in Arabic documents. One for Europe called "The Project" was found in 2001 in Switzerland, another for North America was found in 2005 called the "General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America."[25] An evaluation of this Memorandum was made for the US-Congress and for the Pentagon.[26] Their influence is fast growing, especially in Europe, but not easy to trace while the active members have to keep their membership secret.

But did it quote from the official charter of the Muslim Brotherhood? Because the next quote you have says: Energizing political work fronts (e.g. in civil political organisations). I do not support the Muslim Brotherhood, they can defend themselves on what they do. Like they said, its a "secret group", but I can only tell you only based on what my friend (who's father is part of the MB in my locality) says - my friend himself rejected joining the group. I can describe what he was told when he was offered membership - but lets leave that for later. I couldn't care less about MB, and I don't want to defend their actions as I don't represent them.

I believe Wiki refers to the govrenment transcript submission/exhibit linked to reference item 28 on the wiki page. The pdf file of the transcript does mention Muslim Brotherhood. Of course, it is up to the "believers" to take this as a fabrication or not.

Ok thanks for clarifying that it is not quoting from the Muslim Brotherhood itself.

Quote:
By default Jihad includes violent Jihad, and a careful counting of the instances and context of Jihad in any of the more popular or standard Hadith collections overwhelmingly associate Jihad with violence.

Wow, so you now tell muslims what to believe. Excellent.

I do not tell Muslims anything to believe (at least not yet). I can provide the major interpretations and statements about Jihad from the narratives and Islamic law interpreters themselves.

[/quote]
So vaguely mentioning Jihad must mean they want violent Jihad despite the fact that they say they are opposed to violent means - every terrorist seems to be creating a new organisation and rejecting the MBs non-violent ways.

[shyamd]

Ok shyam so now we are getting somewhere

i agree about 67 borders but the Arabs also want "right to return'.

Yeah, but that's where Israel can come in for negotiation and both can work for a just solution for them. But Israel ain't coming forward, in fact they decided to build more settlements.

[brihaspati]

shyamd wrote
Didn't the christians expel the jews first in israel? Then the Babylonians conquered Judah - expelled them to babylon. Then went to Roman rule - Byzantine - Persians (fought together with the Jews and then expelled the jews) - Arab rule (jewish population dwindled even further due to taxation) - Crusaders (killed more jews left or sold them as slaves) - Muslim army's back (give jews some freedom, so some return) - Ottomon (slowly more jews come from russia/eastern europe) - British.

This is news to me - so Christians came before the Babylonians? Well yes, Babylonians took part of them - mostly the elite - to Babylon. But there were sufficient numbers left behind because this gave rise to sectarian difference later on between those who had been allowed to stay behind and those who later on returned. Why miss conveniently this piece of history and also the fact that Cyrus allowed the Jews to return? Neither the internal difference nor the question of return would have arisen if the Jews had all been "cleaned up"! From there it did not go straight to Roman rule. It went through the Greek and then they had the Macabean uprising leading to an independent principality. Romans destroyed the temple built by Herod but complete expulsion of all Jews is hard to prove. Byzantines did not expel Jews in any significant numbers, and in fact Jews were persecuted by the Goths on suspicion of being collaborators of the Byzantines.

Persians expelled the Jews!!! In the Persian(Parthian)-Byzantine conflict, a portion of the Jews did side with the Byzantines. Did it lead to expulsion? Byzantium actually won in the end (Heraclius). Ah yes, the population dwindled under "taxation" - of course, there cannot be any role of forced conversions or genocides at the hands of Islamics!! of course - but why should taxation decrease population? I thought the Hamas claimed that Jews had always been protected under Islam! Okay those who could not pay the taxes converted? Migrated out? Are you saying that Jews were subjected to discriminatory taxation beyond their means - by the Muslims? For otherwise all populations should have decreased under taxation and not just the Jews!

Well Crusaders are definitely reported to have killed Jews. They are also reported to have killed Muslims, and even Christians. So this cannot be seen as part of war and general war-culture of those times? Such excuses are only applicable if they excuse Islamic war-"crimes" of historical periods?

Okay, Crusaders expelled all Jews - lets say! Kind Muslims let them return [I will post the other side of the story. Since the propaganda here is now turning to Muslims being most kind to the Jews!]. So the Jews were returning already from the time after the Crusades? And their "return" increased? In spite of constant protests and demands that Jews should not be allowed to settle? But you are already saying Jews were there for the previous five hundred years from 1948!!!

Okay, so who kicked the Israeli's out? there was a lot of people responsible for it - so you want to make history right by kicking out the people who lived there during 1948? Answer that for me.

You seem to relish the expression "kicking Israelis out". Assuming that it s no personal problem with you, have you ever thought how you can "kick" a "nation" or whole community out repeatedly? Unless some were definitely not kicked out? Or why allow some one to "return" if they did not have a "homeland" to return to? You are completely suppressing the lead up to the 1948 war. You are now probably even going to deny the antics of the so-called Grand Mufti of the region, the various conflicts and open declarations of intent to expel the Jews, agitating to stop Jewish immigration from the Muslim side. We even know that the Brits actually gave in to this Islamist demand and tried to restrict Jewish inflow. At that stage, Jews were buying land - they were not simply squatting or occupying land.

Now if I see a hostile community who have openly declared intent to finish me off, if they get half a chance, I will treat the members of that community with suspicion, and every sign of hostile preparation as a preparation to wipe me out. I would definitely try to restrict the possibility.

I am trying to say, I owned land, kicked out for whatever reason, house is sold on to numerous people over the years, after 80 years, I decide to come back(because of my personal circumstances) and say I used to live there, get out of my property. Is that fair to the guy who bought the house to be kicked out after many years and confined to one small room out of the house?

Your comparison is fallacious. Jews were in continuous occupation of the land, maybe their numbers dwindled, and they lost out state power. "Kicked out for whatever reasons" is a highly callous attitude. Those reasons are all-important. Who kicked whom for what. Those who try to avoid the reasons do so because they perhaps have some thing to hide. In the case of "kicking Jews" - the Islamic reason is out and out ideological, racial and genocidic. Why are you avoiding looking at the Islamic narratives themselves about descriptions about which Muslims kicked "Jews" for what motivation? The Badr wars, the genocide of Banu Quraizah, the battle of Khyber? It is not Judaic claim - it is all there in the most respected texts of Islam!

Your claim of "those who bought" the house is again legally fallacious.

You say the occupants were "kicked out" and new residents bought them from the "possessors". Now if the initial act of "kicking out" was illegal then the subsequent occupation was illegal. If you buy stolen goods or "illegally occupied" property/object then your rights are not legally acceptable. At least not in most modern legal thinking (only in Islamic thinking there is a justification for that in the context of property/women obtained through jihad - that "vague" thing you mock, and which is supposed to be non-violent according to you - the basis for this starts in Al Baqara of Quran and explictly mentioned in the Hidaya).