The Israel/Palestine Conflict Mk. IV

Do you intelligent language?

If you're trying to imply that repression of a cancerous ideology equates to the murder Israel is currently perpetrating, then suffice to say that it doesn't.

Hitler should have been put down and European Jews would have gone on living in Europe, effectively the only home they knew; they did not have to be strategically stationed in the middle of the Arabs they so loathe; not only that but on land rightfully belonging to Arabs, purged of Arabs for their benefit.

That was done for purely selfish reasons, and facilitated the rise of Zionism, which is the cause of so much disquiet today.

What gives European Jews exclusive rights to Palestine?

I didn't explain in words the hypocrisy of your post because I was interested to see if you could work it out for yourself. I even tried to help you out by bolding the relevant parts. You didn't get it though, and I suspect that even if I told you you wouldn't understand. People like you cannot be reasoned with.

what gives arabic muslims the right to exclusive rights to Palestine? your question is stupid

As I said before:

Plus, suppose if most Muslims have stood up against Israel's attacks on Palestine, what is wrong with that? Why wouldn't you expect them to stand up against it? Would you not stand up for someone innocent who shared your beliefs and was brutally killed ? The truth is that innocent Palestinians are killed and it cannot be justified whatsoever. Please I request you to address the real problem, the killing of innocent humans, you are also a human and I'm sure humanity is higher than anything even for you.

You cannot generalise the whole nation. I stand against every unjust act committed against any human, regardless of their religion. The Delhi rape case, the murder of April Jones, the astonishing murder of a teacher in Leeds, the sexual harassment of young Muslim girls by so-called Imams, the unjustified murder of Lee Rigby, the 9/11 attacks, the Drone attacks that's killing innocent civilians in Pakistani region of Waziristan, the increasing ratio of Pakistani men raping young White girls and many more are very unjust acts that I'm against of because its concerned with humanity.

For you to only take notice of such a minor issue and questioning why non-Arab Muslims only protest against Palestinian issue when there's a lot of other things to worry about is clearly delusional. Plus, to point out such issues and placing such importance on them is in itself a propaganda against non-Arab Muslims and pointless because the main matter here is the loss of human lives and not who supports it and who doesn't.

Oh, you're back, complete with your historical inaccuracies.
'Arabic Muslims' never did have exclusive rights to Palestine, there were Arab Palestinians who were Christian, Muslim and Jewish, all of them lived together until colonial Britain came along with its imperialist agenda. Currently, Jews are reaping the privileges of 20th century expeditions in the Middle East. So you see, that is not a stupid question at all.

The simplest solution would be for a third party to get involved and force them all to get along, but that would never happen, not least because the necessary measures that would have to come with it (such as an amount of indiscriminate killing) would be internationally condemned. I suppose, on the flip side it could cause them to settle their differences to fight a common foe. Either way, it's impractical.

I think, in some respects, Christianity is to blame in all this (and this isn't just some antotheistic rant) in that it hardly helped the tribal issues when you're being further split. By extension the eastern roman empire is to blame also. You also have to consider the question "had Christianity never gained a following, would Islam exist today, and if so how would be ideology be different? " because I can't believe that there is no influence from Christianity.

It's also worth noting that your argument against islamists can be applied to religion in general. Religion drives people and communities apart, the are plenty of examples, Palestine and Ireland being two examples. Religion (or lack of, which imo is preferable) should bring people together, not drive them apart. However religion is intrinsically flawed and cannot truly allow union of all man (unless you manage to reduce it to a small enough sample).

Posted from TSR Mobile

my argument is a logical one and so in theory can be applied to most comparable howver the issue of islamic doctrine and subsequent land grabbing is the most pertinent one. what do all islamic groups in kashmir, chechnya, uhigur china, nigeria etc etc etc all say? that they want land to come under islamic control. same mindset of islam in the 8th century- except we are in 21st century. yes palestinians may have some claim to territory there ( borders unclear) but the islamic motive is a defunct one, and actually has hindered any progress in this area. what are Isis doing in iraq right now? marching armies in and trying to establish an islamic caliphate- what do you think happend there in 8th century? so yes, if you approach the issue form an islamic viewpoint, you are frankly stupid, in the same way if you did from some evangelical or zionist appoach) But in the islamic world it is the islamists that have all the control - who is it that can start a war at a moments notice , or chant some slogans from the quran and have a thousand human sacrifices on the doorstep to follow their bidding? it is the islamists, the sheikihs, emirs, extreme islamic leaders . they control all the poltic issues involving muslims, including palestine. so yes, in the case of palestine, hamas etc we are still dealing with backward mentalities and propaganda - which cannot be solved by simply sitting round tables.

As evidently what I worked out isn't what you worked out, perhaps when you're done playing the Buddha you will put in legible writing whatever struck you as amiss in my words. Everything else you say is irrelevant - 'people like you' - I like that - as though you are even remotely acquainted with the person that I am.

How can you tell the faith of such militants' groups? For example, I can convert to Judaism and start killing Christians. If some Israeli funded so called "Islamic" militants are killing people then it doesn't make any sense that you know their true faith & label them as Muslim.

You need to understand that a terrorist doesn't have any religion. For example, Hitler was Christian and he killed thousands of Jews so it doesn't mean the Christians are evil.

if you read my post youd ahve seen i referred to specific islamic terorist groups like for example al shabab, isis, lashkar e taiba etc , who are very much islamic - which kind of gives their faith away . anyway the point was the problems in palestine are not unique to that region, and places where there are groups following islamic agendas exhibit the same problem. the reality of palestine is that those groups face a much less tolerant opponent in the israelis

Sorry but you are not making any sense. I am a Muslim & I know my religion very well than those non-Muslims who always portray it as a violent religion which is untrue.

sorry but thats rubbish, im not getting into a theological discussion with you ( if you want to there are plenty of threads here we can) many faiths justify use of violence ( primarily because in past societies using violence was the norm) and islam is no exception. you are going to try and suggest that no hamas member is actual a muslim becaase they are violent? perhaps you need to examine islamic history a little - islam arrived in 'palestine' by the sword

what gives arabic muslims the right to exclusive rights to Palestine? your question is stupid

The blood libel refers to the accusation during mediaeval times that Jews consumed the blood of Christian children during their religious rituals, such as passover. The myth of the blood libel was one of the prime historical motivators of anti-semitism in Europe, which in turn was the main driving force for the Zionist movement and the creation of State of Israel thereafter. Most rational people don't believe in the blood libel in its literal form today, but sadly the association between Jews and blood has seeped into the subconscious of many people, which manifests itself when they describe the military offensives of Israel with phrases like "blood-letting" and "bloodthirsty", usually without realising.

Do you see now the irony of it all?