Ask a Muslim

[Sidhe]

That's like me saying that Washington DC should be made a universal city and not an American city.

Jerusalem is Muslim land. Again, in 1917, Palestinians owned 97% of the land of Palestine. You can't just take land because your religion says it's important.

You can and they did, but you do have to understand that the 1967 war as a pre-emptive strike was actually a very well thought out move that worked out very well, problem is they still think it's theres by right of conquest or religion or some such baloney; the UN begs to differ, but of course the UN is not allowed to do it's job by the veto of other interested parties, if you ask me the US has screwed the situation up and kept the whole situation in a state of boiling antipathy much more historically than the original partition plan, and there should be some balance, there isn't but alls fair in nonsensical war and BS onesided politics. I don't support either side, I think there both mired in pointless conflict agrivated by western interest. And I think little will change unless the situation is resolved by more visionary minds.

Meat for another thread too methinks

 

[Xanikk999]

Do you view alternative sexual practices as immoral?

How strict of a muslim are you?

 

[Rossiya]

That's like me saying that Washington DC should be made a universal city and not an American city...or saying that Houston should be made a universal city since it's so important to space and all humans should be in on space.

Jerusalem is Palestinian land. Again, in 1917, Palestinians owned 97% of the land of Palestine. You can't just take land because your religion says it's important.

No, Judaism, Christianity and Islam all have very sacred and important buildings in Jerusalem. Washington DC is not even 250 years old; it doesn't have any important religious buildings.

 

[Salah-Al-Din]

Brother Knight--thank you for not attacking my post about Turks. Much appreciated. I saw you reply to this thread, and was like "oh noooooo..." I just can't think of another example off the top of my head.

How much of that land did they sell?

OK, let's review. I'll...say...this...slowly.

The argument that the Jews *bought* the land does not work, because they only managed to buy 4.5% of the land. Let's review...real slowly for you, since I think you missed it.

Are...you...ready?

In 1917, Jews owned 2.5% of the land.

Between 1917 and 1948, the Jews managed to get 7% of the land. Meaning that in that time period, if you say that they "bought" land, the maximum amount of land they bought was 4.5% more.

After this time period, the issue of "buying" land doesn't exist because there was a war and Israel militarily occupied the remaining 93%.

Therefore, to conclude, your argument that the land was bought falls flat on its face because even after years of genocide, years of buying out the land and swindling the Palestinians, they still managed to only have 7% of the land.

 

[Whomp]

That's like me saying that Washington DC should be made a universal city and not an American city...or saying that Houston should be made a universal city since it's so important to space and all humans should be in on space.

Jerusalem is Palestinian land. Again, in 1917, Palestinians owned 97% of the land of Palestine. You can't just take land because your religion says it's important.

Sharing is caring my friend. It's why I suggest it should be an open city for all religions.

On Sidhe's comments Sykes-Picot Agreement and the Balfour Declaration before slinging rocks, my friend.

 

[Sidhe]

Skadistic your on a loser if you think the partition plan was fair, it was possibly the defining moment in stupidity of the post war history in the 20th century, defending it is pointless. A plan that they knew would result in animosity and war off the bat, because no Muslim countries agreed to it, and a plan based on Zionist propoganda put before Truman, they fumbled the ball, it was an awful idea, based on logic that is true, based on politics? Well that isn't even close to logic.


That said little in the last 50 years has shown any competence in politics, they are their now, and the issues need to be resolved, your not going to make a case that they shouldn't be their, only a case of how to solve the disputes, and that takes better politicains than exist now. Came close with the Camp David accords in the year 2000, but not close enough for both parties.

Sharing is caring my friend. It's why I suggest it should be an open city for all religions.

On Sidhe's comments Sykes-Picot Agreement and the Balfour Declaration before slinging rocks, my friend.

Oh I'll jump right on board in showing where we went wrong don't you doubt it, but we were terrorised out of an area, and at least our agreements were made with both parties taken into account. We funked up, the US funked up, the UN funked up. I at least am fully willing to acknowledge the funkadelity of our funkedupedness

 

[Salah-Al-Din]

More guns? Are you out of your mind lad? Every shot of a person in Pakistan or Iraq or somewhere, there is always a random person holding an AK 47.

Hi. When someone says "conquering by the gun" or "by the sword" it does not literally refer to a gun or a sword. It refers to greater military might. Israel has the 4th strongest military in the world.

And about the bases for Palestine being Jewish.

That's not a sentence, and even if it were, it wouldn't make sense.

The Jews got there first, and there has always been a Jewish presence, be it only 3% at some point.

OK, Hi. Let's...review...

Jews did not enter the area of Palestine until 1250 BC. Before that point in time, Arabs were in the land, and in fact, the Arabs founded Jericho much before the Jewish invasion of Palestine.

 

[Rossiya]

Hi. When someone says "conquering by the gun" or "by the sword" it does not literally refer to a gun or a sword. It refers to greater military might. Israel has the 4th strongest military in the world.

Note to self: learn English from a non-native English speaker.

That's not a sentence, and even if it were, it wouldn't make sense.

Note to self: learn English from a non-native English speaker.

OK, Hi. Let's...review...

Jews did not enter the area of Palestine until 1250 BC. Before that point in time, Arabs were in the land, and in fact, the Arabs founded Jericho much before the Jewish invasion of Palestine.

We are talking about Muslims, not Arabs.

Were they all sentences?

 

[Salah-Al-Din]

Sharing is caring my friend. It's why I suggest it should be an open city for all religions.

When the rightful Muslims owned the land, such as under Umar bin Khattab (ra) and Salah Al-Din (ra), the Muslims always allowed Jews and Christians to make pilgramages freely and to do whatever religious rites they wanted in Jerusalem. So yes, in that sense it should be an open city.

 

[Xanikk999]

This whole debate on who got thier first is pointless.

Its not going to work to get rid of israel or give most of the land back.

Now that they are settled there would be hell to pay if Israel was forced to give back much of its territory.

I dont think israel should of been formed in the first place but right now its irreversable.

And it doesnt matter who was there before hand. I dont see turkey giving its territory back to the christians in the area, or the U.S handing control to native american traditionalists.

 

[skadistic]

Who founded and built Jerusilum?


Years of genocide? Against who? Exactly how many were killed? Were they all killed for no ther reason then being arabs/ muslims? What about the arab/muslims that live in Israel? Is paying above market prices for land swindling? You know who swindled the palllies the most was Arafat.

 

[Sidhe]

Who founded and built Jerusilum?


Years of genocide? Against who? Exactly how many were killed? Were they all killed for no ther reason then being arabs/ muslims? What about the arab/muslims that live in Israel? Is paying above market prices for land swindling? You know who swindled the palllies the most was Arafat.

Can we take this to another thread, like homosexuality it's a bit of a derailment, I'd ask we open up or continue the myriad of threads on this issue if we want to debate them, it's not all that relevant and serves to confuse a thread that should be asking about Muslims and Islam, not politics.

 

[Salah-Al-Din]

Note to self: learn English from a non-native English speaker.

I don't understand your statement once again.

If this is implying that English is not my first language, it actually is.

We are talking about Muslims, not Arabs.

The land belongs to Arabs, no matter *what* religion they are. If the Arabs of Palestine converted to Bhuddism or became Mormon, does this mean all of a sudden they don't have a right to their land.

The first inhabitants were Arab. There have always been Arabs, even during the time of the Jewish rule. The land has always been Arab. What religion the Arabs follow has no relevance. Peoples change religion all the time. That doesn't mean they lose the right to their land.

 

[skadistic]

Islam is political they are inseperable he is a muslim and I asked him questions.

 

[Sidhe]

Islam is political they are inseperable he is a muslim and I asked him questions.

Yeah I agree, but they are better handled in a different thread if you want to know about Islam, asking him about his political beliefs is hardly going to give you a bigger picture of Islam, only of a Muslims political views, I don't see the need to drag this endlessly for the next two pages into the ME debate. We have threads already for that. Create a new one if you want to talk politics not religion. Of course it's only a request, your choice.

 

[Salah-Al-Din]

And it doesnt matter who was there before hand. I dont see turkey giving its territory back to the christians in the area, or the U.S handing control to native american traditionalists.

There is a huge difference. The Native Americans were almost all wiped out. The Palestinians still exist, despite Israel's fervent efforts. Therefore, the Right of Return must be given to the Palestinians, which is binding by international law and is UN resolution 242 which Israel continually flouts.

Who founded and built Jerusilum?

Jerusalem was founded by the Jebusites during the Bronze Age. The Jebusites are the ancestors of the Arabs. Your point? Other than shooting yourself in the foot?

Years of genocide? Against who?

Umm..against Arabs.

Exactly how many were killed?

Millions killed and displaced/expelled from their homes.

Were they all killed for no ther reason then being arabs/ muslims?

For not being Jewish.

Is paying above market prices for land swindling?

Your statement is irrelevant because we have already discussed that by 1948, Jews still only owned 7% of the land.

 

[Salah-Al-Din]

Yeah I agree, but they are better handled in a different thread if you want to know about Islam, asking him about his political beliefs is hardly going to give you a bigger picture of Islam, only of a Muslims political views, I don't see the need to drag this endlessly for the next two pages into the ME debate. We have threads already for that. Create a new one if you want to talk politics not religion. Of course it's only a request, your choice.

I agree. I would rather discuss other things.

 

[knigh+]

Brother Knight--thank you for not attacking my post about Turks. Much appreciated. I saw you reply to this thread, and was like "oh noooooo..." I just can't think of another example off the top of my head.

What, this?

The Turks of Central Asia lived in various parts of Asia, and eventually they settled in Turkey. Now would the people of Turkey have the right to claim those parts of Central Asia that they left thousands of years ago?

No worries brother, I agree with it.

About the Israel business, here is what I think: What was done after ww2 was wrong, but they have been there had children and grandchildren there, so now it is their homeland too. That said I think Israel is the side that needs to learn how to share, and stop their self-righteous claims on more land than what the UN has recognized as theirs.


Here is another question from me: What do you think about the Saudis not allowing any non-muslims to enter Mecca? Personally I don't remember ever approving anything Saudis did, and this is no exception. I think they should allow at least ehl-i-kitab (Jews and Christians) to visit the first temple to God of Abraham.

Do you view alternative sexual practices as immoral?

What kind of practices? If you mean homosexuality or bisexuality, then yes for the practices, but not necessarily the people, as they may have other very moral characteristics (but they start with a minus point in their scorecard). I think I hold them about as responsible/immoral as I would hold a drug addict (what they are doing is wrong but they can't help it - Don't confuse this with viewing such practices as an addiction, I don't).

How strict of a muslim are you?

Not very. But I also have many friends/relatives that are even less devout (I didn't like the word "strict"). Let's say I am 40% strict (+/-10%)

 

[skadistic]

There is a huge difference. The Native Americans were almost all wiped out. The Palestinians still exist, despite Israel's fervent efforts. Therefore, the Right of Return must be given to the Palestinians, which is binding by international law and is UN resolution 242 which Israel continually flouts.



Jerusalem was founded by the Jebusites during the Bronze Age. The Jebusites are the ancestors of the Arabs. Your point? Other than shooting yourself in the foot?



Umm..against Arabs.



Millions killed and displaced/expelled from their homes.



For not being Jewish.



Your statement is irrelevant because we have already discussed that by 1948, Jews still only owned 7% of the land.

I like how you left out the Arafat part. And about the arab/mulims living in Israel.

It shows alot.

And genocide doesn't include getting removed from you home. And did I shoot my self in the foot asking who funded Jerusilum? Tell me were the Jews arabs that lived in Jerusilum when it became the great city it was? Are the jews there now not decendants from arabs?

Look why don't you and your ilk mass an army and take Israel back by force if you don't like it instead of crying about it. Face it you lost the land. You tried before to take it back and lost. So keep trying untill you win or kill your selfs off.

 

[Sidhe]

I like how you left out the Arafat part. And about the arab/mulims living in Israel.

It shows alot.

And genocide doesn't include getting removed from you home. And did I shoot my self in the foot asking who funded Jerusilum? Tell me were the Jews arabs that lived in Jerusilum when it became the great city it was? Are the jews there now not decendants from arabs?

Look why don't you and your ilk mass an army and take Israel back by force if you don't like it instead of crying about it. Face it you lost the land. You tried before to take it back and lost. So keep trying untill you win or kill your selfs off.

Skadistic expecting you to graciously decline to talk about this in a thread where it has no relevance, is like expecting you to have an unbiased view about the Middle East based on your media propaganda, obviously never likely to happen, ever heard of discretion? I ask again no one but you wants to discuss this, take it to another thread where your inane biased claptrap can be destroyed in more detail again