July 18, 2006. Naveed Afzal Haq, an American Muslim invaded the Jewish Federation of Seattle and shot six people. No doubt he said, Praise be to Allah, as he shot at a pregnant woman. HE KILLED THE JEWS:
(CTV.CA 29 July, 2006) On Friday, a man armed with a large calibre
semi-automatic handgun walked into Seattle's Jewish Federation and opened
fire -- killing one woman and wounding five others before he surrendered to
a SWAT team minutes.
One is dead. One is still pregant and lightly wounded.
The others will bear their wounds and live on, maimed.
I have been too quiet about Islam's evil side for too long. I read the Quran more than 30 years ago and have reread parts of it many, many times. The Quran shares much with the Book of Moroni, the Vedas, the Torah, the New Testament, and the Hymns of Zarathrustra... Before science, some guy comes to earth and spreads "truth." The truth has many good things .. often liberating people form oppressive priesthoods while combining moral lessons with cosmological nonsense. And all portray truths that lead to hate if not abetted. Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, have evolved since their revelations. The Hindus have their Bhagvad Gita and Ghandi, the Christians have Luther and Martin Luther King, We Jews have too many teahcers ot mention even a few. Even the Mormons, with their science fiction soap opera of a revelation, have evolved to accept Black folks as humans.
Jews have not wanted to kill idolaters for 2500 years and have become leader of social reform for Marx to Alinskly. Today in the hell of Lebanaon how many Muslim schools
Am I evil for reciting this part of the Quran? Do I not see beauty in Islam?
I love much in the Quran. I admoire muslims who submit to G-d, submit to a brotherhood of man where all ahev the same needs and rights to learning and food. I only wish in preaching the Ummaya, the concept of one mankind, there was room in that house for thoise who worhip Krishna or accept the Torah.
I hope I am not Evil, There is no Muslim more proud than I of the eras of Jewish/Muslim collaboration, the era of Harun A Rashid in Baghdad (763-800), Saladin (1138-1193) in Egypt and Jerusalem, and, of course the magnificence of the Andalusian era in Spain. In an era of Christian darkness, Islam’s celebration of the intellect and acceptance of Jews and co-believers in G-d, led to an explosion of knowledge that would not be rivaled until the Enlightenment. Yet, even then Islam failed to reform itself. While the Imans of Harun al Rashid’s Baghdad or Toledo may have studied with Rabbis, they never questioned the evil parts of the Quran.
Islam is today an evil religion. The evil is not confined to primitive madrassa in Pakistan or the bizar goldened robed Wahabi congregations in modern Medina. It is endemic and will be until, one must hope, a new Islam .. a Quaker movement, a movement like Hassidism, or perhaps a return to the too brief teachings of Akbar the Magnificent rule of India.
Until then, I will believe that the term “good muslim” is akin to “good KKK.”
Peace be unto all humans, even if that means those that hate others must die.
21 comments:
Sorry, Haq converted to Christianity last year. Back to the drawing board, moron.
Mentally disturbed people kill others all the time. While there appears to be some underying connection between his nationality and/or former religion, you are stretching this into your devices. As thehim suggests, back to the drawing board... on your whole ideology. Learn to fact check and dig deeper than the first news report you watched on TV.
Nothing I said is incorrect. Hak identified himself as a Muslim. If you nderstood Islam, one can not actually convert fromn Islam and he appears not t have accepted his Baptism,
Beyond that, my only point is that the teaching of hateful things .. by any religion, nationality, poltical party or other human group is wrong.
Tolerating the teachings of Islam will not make the teachings go away. Too many pople have already doies because of tose teachings.
The alternative, of course we all should seek peace and press Islam for the reforms it badly needs.
Nothing I said is incorrect. Hak identified himself as a Muslim. If you nderstood Islam, one can not actually convert fromn Islam and he appears not t have accepted his Baptism,
Well, he did convert from Islam. So he must not have been a good Muslim then, huh? Get it through your head, Steve. This guy's hatred did not come from his religion, it came from a mix of mental illness and the politics of the Middle East.
Beyond that, my only point is that the teaching of hateful things .. by any religion, nationality, poltical party or other human group is wrong.
Tolerating the teachings of Islam will not make the teachings go away. Too many pople have already doies because of tose teachings.
No, this is absolutely incorrect. Tolerating people who simply hate others is the best antidote to their power. In America, we don't go around locking up neo-Nazis. They can freely march and say their nonsense. They only become a problem when they act out on their hate. This is not stupidity, it's the key to why America has become such a peaceful place. The Israelis simply don't get this, and this is why they've buried themselves into a dead-end in the Middle East.
The alternative, of course we all should seek peace and press Islam for the reforms it badly needs.
I'm with you, but this can't be done through war. It can only be done by empowering the moderates through democratic reform. War prevents those democratic reforms from happening, they don't intimidate people into liking us.
Tolerance" has many flavors. For example, there are some who believe it is tolerant to accept Ebonics or the use of Spanish by receptionists and others who deal with the American majority. I do not think such tolerance is a good idea at all.
Similarly, while doing all I can to understand Islam and make peace, I would be a fool ... and many are ... by "tolerating" the bigotry that Muslims are taught. Your comparison with the Nazis is apt. We, you and I, would not tolerate their racism. We would speak out, criticize it and tell them that to be part of our society they need to change. No? That is the analogy I am making with Islam. Teaching that the Jews stole Palestine, drink blood, betrayed the Prophet, and control the world ought to be as unacceptable as Nazi doctrine is. Why would you be more tolerant of Muslims than of Nazis?
Is it a matter of degree? How are you with the Jesuits/ with missionaries? with Jews for Jesus? with Fundies?
Your comparison with the Nazis is apt. We, you and I, would not tolerate their racism. We would speak out, criticize it and tell them that to be part of our society they need to change. No?
You can tolerate something while still criticizing it. That's the point. I will and do criticize racism, but I am not comfortable with anyone who says that others can't be part of our society unless they start thinking differently. That's absolutely wrong. It goes against the basic concepts of free thought and free will. Now if someone acts upon their racism and actually harms someone, then I can no longer tolerate it.
Teaching that the Jews stole Palestine, drink blood, betrayed the Prophet, and control the world ought to be as unacceptable as Nazi doctrine is. Why would you be more tolerant of Muslims than of Nazis?
Is it a matter of degree? How are you with the Jesuits/ with missionaries? with Jews for Jesus? with Fundies?
My rule is very simple. One can think whatever they want. When one acts on it, I don't tolerate it. It doesn't matter what religion you are. This is what being a libertarian is about to me. It's an understanding that this pragmatic approach to personal freedom is the most effective way to preserve the good relations we have among a very diverse poopulace.
Thehim ..
FREE WILL .....
You seem a bit muddled by difficult ideas ... for example "free speech" and "free will." Free will is the Religious concept that humans are not controlled by the deity or by fate. I may have may illusions but none of them include by ability to determine other's fate. As for free thought, unless you are a telepath, why would I know what you think? .. or perhaps you meant to refer to free speech?
TOLERATING INTOLERANCE
As for your second point, you say you tolerate any ideas as long as there is no action based on that thought.
I gather you think we should tolerate teaching that Jews drink Christian blood as long as we do not have Pogroms?
Yes, under our laws we can not prevent the Aryan nation from teaching that Catholics are evil or the State of Kansas form teaching that women evolved from ribs.
BUT, we can each work to render such teachings socially unacceptable. Similarly, much of what is commonly taught to Muslim children about Jews ought not to be socially acceptable.
This makes me curious. Do you MEAN what you say? Are you tolerant of the teaching of Nazi Ideas? Is it OK to consider Gay people as to be shunned? Or do you think it is OK to teach that Black people are dirty? Or does tolerance have some selective filters .. e.g. what Islam teaches is OK but what the KKK teaches in not? How do you make this decision? Is it a matter of degree?
Your Blog
I will not repeat some of the things you say about me on your blog. I am certainly sorry if theher did not like something I said, but isn't that EXACTLY the kind of intolerance you describe? Or is my speech an act?
I do wish you would not make ad hominem remarks and would invite you to introduce yourself so we can, perhaps, have amore amicable discussion next time I do get to Tues night at the tavern.
In my world, tolerance does not extend so far. I support largely untrammeled free speech (and its antecedent thought) but that does not mean I have not participated in boycotts and protests against racism.
As for your second point, you say you tolerate any ideas as long as there is no action based on that thought.
I gather you think we should tolerate teaching that Jews drink Christian blood as long as we do not have Pogroms?
For one, it depends on who's doing the teaching. No government entity should be allowed to teach such nonsense. That's obvious. But if a Christian family chooses to teach their children something that retarded, they should not be considered criminals for doing so. If the child acts on that, however, then I'm open to the parents being held responsible for the child's actions (although there's a lot of gray there, depending on the child's age, etc).
Yes, under our laws we can not prevent the Aryan nation from teaching that Catholics are evil or the State of Kansas form teaching that women evolved from ribs.
BUT, we can each work to render such teachings socially unacceptable. Similarly, much of what is commonly taught to Muslim children about Jews ought not to be socially acceptable.
I completely agree that we can render such teachings socially unacceptable. That's one of the things that this country has actually been quite good at. Where I disagree with you is concerning the last statement. In this country, it is simply not true that Muslim children are commonly taught things about Jews that are unacceptable. In other parts of the world, absolutely. But not here. And by willfully exaggerating this phenomenon in the United States, it's actually you who is saying things about Muslims that are socially unacceptable.
Continued...
This makes me curious. Do you MEAN what you say? Are you tolerant of the teaching of Nazi Ideas? Is it OK to consider Gay people as to be shunned? Or do you think it is OK to teach that Black people are dirty? Or does tolerance have some selective filters .. e.g. what Islam teaches is OK but what the KKK teaches in not? How do you make this decision? Is it a matter of degree?
There's no inconsistency in what I'm saying. I believe that all racism is immoral, but not criminal unless it directly effects another person. If we forget that, then we cross a line that our Constitution is meant to prevent.
I will not repeat some of the things you say about me on your blog. I am certainly sorry if theher did not like something I said, but isn't that EXACTLY the kind of intolerance you describe? Or is my speech an act?
I regret writing that stuff about my wife. She wasn't annoyed with you as much as I made it appear. She actually criticized me for writing that as well. She just wasn't having a good time there.
I do wish you would not make ad hominem remarks and would invite you to introduce yourself so we can, perhaps, have amore amicable discussion next time I do get to Tues night at the tavern.
I have no problem with that. We had a long discussion once, and some things you said really bugged me. The call-in when I was on Goldy's show also rubbed me the wrong way. I'm never afraid of a debate.
In my world, tolerance does not extend so far. I support largely untrammeled free speech (and its antecedent thought) but that does not mean I have not participated in boycotts and protests against racism.
My position here is that your view of Muslims (that their religion encourages them to teach others to hate Jews) is just as intolerant as the view that Jews drink the blood of Christians. My criticism is also shaped by something you told me in our original discussion at DL when you said that the Palestinians are incapable of autonomy. I don't know of any way to interpret that statement without concluding that you believe that Palestinians are inferior. And that's the heart of racism.
Well ..
we may be getting somewhere interesting.
1. American (and Indian) Islam
I think there is hope for Islam in the tolerant societies of India and the US. Europe, maybe with time as well. The issue you raise is important .. what do Muslims teach in their schools here or in India?
I do not know. However, do remember three things: Unlike India, in the US most Muslims are either immigrants or first generation. So lessons of childhood refer to the classrooms of Pakistan and Beirut. Next, until 9-11 the Wahabis and the NOI were a major source of dollars and teaching materials. Finally, the Imanate is still largely educated in Muslim ruled countries where Shariya and bigotry are often the law.
But yes, it would be very worthwhile knowing what is taught today in Seattle.
2. Please DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH
Maybe the beer got in your way, but what I told you had nothing to do with ANY prejudice against Palestinians. You must have a need to hear me say such things!
What I told you is that Palestine, constituted as a free standing country in Gaza and the Judean heights ("West Bank") was not economically viable. Canning the Palestinians in this enclave is a recipe for more hell.
I went on to try to explain that the only way to have a solution is either to destroy Israel or to create a viable economy so Palestinians do not grow up in welfare camps.
The latter can not be done in the existing limits of the proposed state. One answer was a Federal State with Israel. I like that idea but the current hatred and the resulting Wall make it unlikely.
So ... what I told you was that the ONLY answer is to support a Palestinians state AND to subsidize joint Jordanian/Palestinian economic development that, eventually, can bring in Israel.
Maybe it was the beer?
3. Tolerance
Again, please do not put words in my mouth.
Nothing I have said would criminalize bigotry. I celebrate the freedom of the KKK, the Islamofascists, the Aryan nation, the Nihilists, the Republicans, and even the Luddites to have their legal right.
Frankly, I think our laws vs, hate speech and cross burning are wrong.
Perhaps we are not so far apart after all? I do like the idea of learning what is being taught on Northgate way!
Steve,
Maybe I did misconstrue what you were saying about the Palestinians but that's not how I remember it. Either way, I'll accept that it was a miscommunication. The Palestinians do face obstacles economically, but I do believe that Israel has played a major role in why they haven't been able to provide security for themselves.
Also keep in mind that there's a major difference between what is taught at home and what is taught in an educational arena. Many Christians and Jews in this country teach their children hate. I'm talking about actual Islamic schools set up to teach hate. That is something we do not have in the United States.
1. Sorry, but if there are ANY Jews who teach their children to hate Christians or Muslims, they must be very few in number. I have never met anyone who has that attitude. Even the JDL folks (Kach) taught defence and they are basically defunct.
Go to my website and read the Haggadah for an idea of how we tech our children to respect others. We even teach them to mourn the Egyptians who died in the Red Sea!
2. Blaming Israel for the ecomomic malaise of the Palestinians is only true in one sense ... Israel's survival does come at the expense of territory that might otherwise be part of an Arab state.
If, however, we assume Israel has a right to exist, I would challenge you to find anything that we ... the Jews or the Israelis .. could do to help the Palestinians that has not been done.
Take alook at Peace Now! for ore ide about Jewish efforts to promote Palestinian well being.
If a peaceful Palestine held out the hand of amity, it would be grasped firmly by our community. You would be, I supect, very impressed with some of the efforts made by Zionists to promote the prosperity of the greater community.
3. How do you know that we do not have Mulim schools that teach hate in the US? I find that stement VERY unlikley to be true since most Imans are educated in Mulim lands where antisemtism is the norm, since many Mosques were/are funded by the Wahaabi sect, and since the nOI is still inexistance.
4. What is taught at hime. I do not know but that and interfaith activities are where the hope MUST lie.
Sorry, but if there are ANY Jews who teach their children to hate Christians or Muslims, they must be very few in number. I have never met anyone who has that attitude. Even the JDL folks (Kach) taught defence and they are basically defunct.
They are very few in number, but they do exist. The same is true of Muslims in the U.S. though.
Go to my website and read the Haggadah for an idea of how we tech our children to respect others. We even teach them to mourn the Egyptians who died in the Red Sea!
Of course, and the same is true of Christianity and Islam. The overwhelming majority of people of all faiths teach their children to respect others.
And if you don't think there's racism in Israel, you're kidding yourself. Khalid El-Amin, a former American college basketball player, went to play in Israel after he couldn't make the NBA. He was consistently booed and heckled because he had a Muslim name.
2. Blaming Israel for the ecomomic malaise of the Palestinians is only true in one sense ... Israel's survival does come at the expense of territory that might otherwise be part of an Arab state.
If, however, we assume Israel has a right to exist, I would challenge you to find anything that we ... the Jews or the Israelis .. could do to help the Palestinians that has not been done.
It's a mistake to focus on economics. Economic success is a function of liberty. The greater liberty you give a people, the greater wealth they can accumulate. However, the Israelis have systematically taken away Palestinians liberty in order to maintain security. This really isn't even under debate. What's under debate is whether or not the restrictions (checkpoints, walls, etc) are necessary.
Regardless of how you feel about that debate, it's becoming hard to escape the fact that we missed a huge opportunity to do something in 2002 (instead of Iraq) when we actually could have gotten support from both the Saudi's (who were asking Cheney to do something) and the Iranians (whose leaders were feeling as weak as they'd been since the 1979 Revolution). In fact, it was strongly believed that Arafat and the Palestinian leadership would've accepted the terms he rejected in 2000.
I believe that Israel has a right to exist, but I also believe that Palestinian have a right to basic human rights. Where the Palestinians live is becoming more and more like a prison camp every day. Neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians can come to a solution on their own, however, it requires a powerful mediator. We should be that mediator, but we don't seem to have any interest in doing the legwork.
continued....
If a peaceful Palestine held out the hand of amity, it would be grasped firmly by our community. You would be, I supect, very impressed with some of the efforts made by Zionists to promote the prosperity of the greater community.
I have relatives in Tel Aviv. I'm well aware of that. I believe that western cultures have achieved a lot in bringing liberty to our societies and I'd love to see the Middle East strive for freer societies. But that's simply not achieved by conquering their lands and making them obey us. In fact, that's very contrary to what has made western societies so successful. Sometimes, militaries can be used to provide stability, but if it's done against the will of the Arab world, it's simply going to be doomed to failure. That's the lesson here. Afghanistan was on its way to being a monumental success and possibly a landmark foreign policy move before our invasion of Iraq and our absurd opium strategy unraveled it.
3. How do you know that we do not have Mulim schools that teach hate in the US? I find that stement VERY unlikley to be true since most Imans are educated in Mulim lands where antisemtism is the norm, since many Mosques were/are funded by the Wahaabi sect, and since the nOI is still inexistance.
I'm not aware of any Muslim schools that teach hate. I'm sure it's possible, but considering the kind of uproar it would cause, you'd think we'd have seen an example on the news if it wasn't just an isolated racist here or there. With that, it's no different from Christianity again, where there's always some crackpot teaching in a parochial school who crosses the line and gets fired.
And by the way, it's important to keep in mind that anti-Semitism wasn't much of a problem until Israel formed. Religion has never been the root cause of the hatred. Jews and Muslims lived together in Middle Eastern cities for centuries. The root cause has always been rooted in politics and how Arab leaders have used Islam as a way to deflect criticism by inflating the threat from "those Jews". As I mentioned to Steve earlier, only sixty years ago, it was much safer to be a Jew in the Middle East than in Europe.
4. What is taught at hime. I do not know but that and interfaith activities are where the hope MUST lie.
And I've seen nothing to indicate that interfaith activities don't thrive in Seattle. People here respect others and reject the absolutism that characterizes Islam in more volatile parts of the world. I've asked several people who I've discussed this with to provide examples of where local Muslims have been intolerant or disrespectful with this tragedy, and no one can point to anything.
Tolerance at home
You and I differ in one very important way. I DO NOT differentiate religions from other sorts of human association. Religions can teach and do good, just as countries, the boy scouts, and corporations can teach and do good. Or ..any of these may be bad.
I too was moved by Muslim comments in Seattle. I only wish such comments were more consistently expressed and that they were accompanied by the sort of community action to promote brotherhood that our community offers to others. Is there, that you know of, a Muslim equivalent of Peace Now?
What I take home from your comments is a feel goodism that MIGHT be accurate here. It is obviously not accurate in France or England. I would like to know more about what is taught. If you look at some of my more recent posts, I have tried to give you some documentation of reasons to at least be concerned about what is taught in Islamic schools.
Israel
Dumping on Israel for not taking a like to a basket ball player with a Muslim name is fine, but the comparison with the virulent antisemitism in the Muslim world is beyond description. BTW, the issues with Histadrut vs. Muslims are more serious and are actively debated in Israel. Try debating Jewish rights in Egypt.
Jews as dimmi
You are naive when it comes to glamorizing the situation facing Jews in the Muslim world .. esp by focusing on sixty years ago. Shure nuff, Jews in Yemen were better off than Jews in Nazi Germany, but ought that to be a standard of comparison? There already had, by that time, been pogroms in Palestine. Jews in Yemen lives a life close to slavery. There were mass murders in Turkey over the blood libel. While there were some better places you only need to look to Mecca, a country that is Judenrein by law. The Muslims achieved that goal of Hitler's 1300 years before the hackenkreuz became a national symbol in the West.
Schools again
Look, it is NOT prejudicial to ask what is being taught today in Muslim schools. I can guarantee you that every Jewish school (and I expect most Christian schools other than those of the Aryan brotherhood) would be willing to share their curricula.
Palestine
Other than dumping on Israel, you and I agree about what the Palestinians need. Israel, unfortunately, can not enforce peace while the Palestinians celebrate an irredentist determination to drive us into the Med. I do not think there is any example of a besieged nation doing better than Israel.
You say you support Israel's right to exist. May I ask why? Israel is, according to you, a foreign, unfair encumbrance. Making Palestine free of Jews or at least subjugating the Jews to the dimmi rules, might well bring peace.
I am not sure of Israel's historic right to exist. In the same vein, however, may I point out that there is no historic justification for the existence of a country called Palestine unless by that term you take its meaning prior to 48 as the enclave in the Middle East where Jews lived. Arabs did not adapt that term until Nasser.
If, however, there is to be peace based on both people's welfare, then the only answer is, as you said, the imposition form outside of peace. I would add ...and prosperity. A rich Israel and an impoverished Palestine is not an image of peace.
Can the US help? not under the current tweedletoes leadership nor can we do it alone. BTW .. the Israelis generally accepted the Saudi proposal, it was widely rejected by the Palestinians. So, for the US to succeed we need an alliance ... we need the Chinese, the Russians and the Europeans to join in imposing peace. Funny thing, peace may not be in their interest.
I too was moved by Muslim comments in Seattle. I only wish such comments were more consistently expressed and that they were accompanied by the sort of community action to promote brotherhood that our community offers to others. Is there, that you know of, a Muslim equivalent of Peace Now?
Yes, there are several that I know of. The Muslim Voices for Peace, Muslims Against Terrorism, and the Muslim Peace Fellowship.
What I take home from your comments is a feel goodism that MIGHT be accurate here. It is obviously not accurate in France or England. I would like to know more about what is taught. If you look at some of my more recent posts, I have tried to give you some documentation of reasons to at least be concerned about what is taught in Islamic schools.
Wrong again, sir. Here are results from the latest Pew survey of global attitudes. As you can see, the favorability rating of Jews by French Muslims is 71%, only 6% lower than ALL Americans. Again, let's deal in facts here, not fairy tales. When you're ready to stop living in pretend-land, where you can't distinguish between isolated incidents and trends, maybe we can start getting to the heart of the matter.
Sadly, what's missing from that chart is American Muslims. That would be telling.
Continued...
I've already left a comment above about what's being taught in Islamic schools. You haven't proven anything other than the fact that material is inaccurate in an anthropological sense, which is also true for just about every Christian school across the country as well. You still haven't given any proof anywhere that Islamic schools in Seattle are teaching kids to hate Jews. If you find an instance where a school is doing so, I'll go there with you and protest it.
Dumping on Israel for not taking a like to a basket ball player with a Muslim name is fine, but the comparison with the virulent antisemitism in the Muslim world is beyond description. BTW, the issues with Histadrut vs. Muslims are more serious and are actively debated in Israel. Try debating Jewish rights in Egypt.
Of course you can't, but the difference is political, not a function of the religion of Islam. You can debate Jewish rights in Turkey, which is also a country predominantly made up of Muslims. Why? Because of the political climate.
You are naive when it comes to glamorizing the situation facing Jews in the Muslim world .. esp by focusing on sixty years ago. Shure nuff, Jews in Yemen were better off than Jews in Nazi Germany, but ought that to be a standard of comparison? There already had, by that time, been pogroms in Palestine. Jews in Yemen lives a life close to slavery. There were mass murders in Turkey over the blood libel. While there were some better places you only need to look to Mecca, a country that is Judenrein by law. The Muslims achieved that goal of Hitler's 1300 years before the hackenkreuz became a national symbol in the West.
And there were times in history where Jews have killed others or forced people out of their homes. What's your point? There's been violence in the world among different tribes of people. We all know that. What I'm saying is that it isn't a particular religion that makes people hate each other. It's a political situation, and for you to believe that Islam is somehow inherently incompatible with Judaism because of words in the Koran, you're the one being naive and missing the point. Hatred of Jews is POLITICAL, not because of what's written in the Koran.
Look, it is NOT prejudicial to ask what is being taught today in Muslim schools. I can guarantee you that every Jewish school (and I expect most Christian schools other than those of the Aryan brotherhood) would be willing to share their curricula.
I'm not saying it's prejudicial to ask, I'm saying it's prejudicial to assume that they're teaching their kids to hate Jews without any evidence.
Continued...
Other than dumping on Israel, you and I agree about what the Palestinians need. Israel, unfortunately, can not enforce peace while the Palestinians celebrate an irredentist determination to drive us into the Med. I do not think there is any example of a besieged nation doing better than Israel.
You're right, Israel can't enforce peace. In order to do that, it would require trust, and Palestinians simply don't trust the Israelis. Some Palestinians have taken this mistrust and let that fester into a determination to drive the Israelis into the sea, but even today, a majority of Palestinians would still like to have a two-state solution. Palestinians who want to drive the Israelis into the sea are still a minority, even if many of them vote for an organization that has been founded on that notion, but is now seen as a protector (Hamas). This happens because most Palestinians don't see Israelis as a legitimate partner for peace. They see them as a force trying to remove them from their land.
You say you support Israel's right to exist. May I ask why? Israel is, according to you, a foreign, unfair encumbrance. Making Palestine free of Jews or at least subjugating the Jews to the dimmi rules, might well bring peace.
I've never said that, and the fact that you think I said that makes me a little concerned that you really don't have the ability to understand the reality here. I believe in policies that look towards the future, not the past. We can't undo any of the injustices of the past. We can only deal with the status quo as it is and move forward. There are those on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian debate who are looking to the past as justification for their attempts to uproot people from the current homes. My objective is to have a two-state solution. That requires that Palestinians give up their desire to reconquer what is now Israel as well as the Israelis give up their desire to hold on to the areas of the West Bank where Palestinians currently reside. As I mentioned before, the Israeli settlement movement is a way to throw a monkey wrench into this very obvious solution, and it's the number 1 reason why there's no trust among Palestinians of the Israelis.
So, for the US to succeed we need an alliance ... we need the Chinese, the Russians and the Europeans to join in imposing peace. Funny thing, peace may not be in their interest.
Exactly, it might not be. This is why, as an advocate for Israel, I've been critical of those who are advocating courses of action that leave us in the position of having to rely on them. In 2002, we had a choice to deal with the Israeli-Palestinian situation, or to go into Iraq (and for your information, Arafat and the Palestinian leadership were in fact willing to accept Saudi conditions in 2002). We made the wrong choice, and now the fate of the Israelis lies much more in the hands of countries that don't care quite so much if they're sent packing to wander through the desert again.
You can start dealing with the situation as it is, or you can keep pretending that the Palestinians are motivated solely by the Koran and making idiotic rants about the dhimmi, rather than being understandably outraged by Israeli heavy-handedness. If we, as a nation, continue to choose the latter, we will not be doing much to support our friends in Israel.
You continue to put word in my mouth. I have never said that I know that teachings in the Mosque are bad, but the cites I gave you should evioke your concern just as they would if they came from some fundie Xtain sect.
Nor have I ever said that ti is only Islam that seperates Israel and the Palestinians.
Why not answer my questions:
1. Why would you trust the Mosques knowing that recently they have been supported by an openly antisemitic (Wahabi) program and that most or all of the Emans trained in traditionally antisemtic cultures?
2. Your claim about Arafat is historically incorrect. Arafat was willing to accept a solution that included his "right of return." In effect this mean the end of Israel. Israel HAS offered Palestine full sovereignity over the West Bank and Gaza and shared governance of Jerusalem. Errr ... what more can Israel offer?
May I suggest that you move this discussion to a more recent thread?
You continue to put word in my mouth. I have never said that I know that teachings in the Mosque are bad, but the cites I gave you should evioke your concern just as they would if they came from some fundie Xtain sect.
Of course, that's my entire point here. There's no reason to be any more concerned with anti-Semitism among Muslims than we are among Christians. I could easily go find some text from a Christian school that is both scientifically incorrect and could potentially be misconstrued in a way to encourage prejudicial opinions of non-Christians.
And I'm not putting words in your mouth. You're the one who was ranting about the Seattle Federation shooting by saying that it's a result of how Muslims are taught to hate Jews. I simply pointed out that you continue to make this accusation without any proof. And you still don't have any proof. Haq was never taught to hate Jews by anyone. He arrived at that point through a mix of mental instability and his reading of Middle East politics.
1. Why would you trust the Mosques knowing that recently they have been supported by an openly antisemitic (Wahabi) program and that most or all of the Emans trained in traditionally antisemtic cultures?
Do they teach children to hate Jews? I could care less where they get their money from. I care about their actions. If they're teaching kids to hate others, that's absolutely wrong and I'm willing to speak up against it. But I'm very wary of guilt-by-association.
2. Your claim about Arafat is historically incorrect. Arafat was willing to accept a solution that included his "right of return." In effect this mean the end of Israel. Israel HAS offered Palestine full sovereignity over the West Bank and Gaza and shared governance of Jerusalem. Errr ... what more can Israel offer?
After the September 11 attacks, Arafat changed his tune and said in 2002 that he would accept Clinton's parameters of the 2000 Camp David summit. There's a mention of that here, and I might be able to find some other articles with more details. Basically, as you'd expect, after September 11, the Arafat act was wearing thin among other Arab leaders. But we missed the opportunity to take advantage of that, and now Hamas is in charge. As a result, we'll have to wait even longer before we'll be in a position where a moderate course that doesn't demand impossible concessions from the Israelis is politically viable.
Oh, and I'll post up something today at Reload if you want to continue over there...
Post a Comment