Why does Most of the Arab World Deny Jews/Israel Belong in the MIddle East.

Invective Heating

Frankly, I'm surprised that as of Page 2 (of what will probably be many) the thread hasn't devolved into something worse than it has.

Maybe it's fatigue, since this is hardly the first time this topic has surfaced around here.

The battle over Israel/Palestine is much bigger than the question of Jews versus Arabs, and bigger than anything I've seen mentioned so far in this thread. And there doesn't seem to be much middle ground.

Why so much hatred and animosity? Because it's a spiritual battle, not just a political one.

It's a Holy War, and as in all holy wars, blood will boil, and blood will spill, as it has, does and ever shall until the war ends. The fervor that drives the combatants isn't fed by human passion alone, but by those who guide them.

When will it end? I don't know.

But the fate of the entire world is intimately tied to the fate of Israel, whether it chooses to believe so or not.

My tuppence. Your mileage may vary.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Had you read, you would have seen that the "Palestinians" have been nothing more than a tool used by the rest of the Arab world to force Israel out of existence.

Could you PLEASE explain how they are using the Palestinians.

What power is it that they have?

The Israeli military is occupying Palestine.

No forces of the Arab governments are on the land.

There is no other country or group that has offered peace more than the Israelis; let's see some action from the other sides, other than attack, murder and lie.

The Arabs offered as much as Israel says they want just a few short years ago, and Israel rejected it.

Israel has not ever offered an equitable deal, or peace.

If you think different PLEASE show us all where Israel did.

Don't bother with the Camp David Accords.

In that Israel offered to give the Al Aqsa Mosque to themselves.

Thats not peace, thats attempted armed robbery.

As I said, knowing the truth keeps one from falling for lies.

You know one half of the propaganda, and very little of the recent history.

An objective look at the situation reveals Israel to be the aggressor.

Ask yourself the real reason why the Palestinians have gone two generations without liberty.

If Israel really were defending itself back in the 1967 sneak attack all lands would have been returned long ago.

Plus muslims have the doctrine that once a land is conquered by muslims, if it is lost, they can never rest until it is re-conquered.

Really? Do they want Spain back?

The battle over Israel/Palestine is much bigger than the question of Jews versus Arabs, and bigger than anything I've seen mentioned so far in this thread. And there doesn't seem to be much middle ground.

I believe that I occupy the middle ground.

If your solution would be establishing pre-war borders, and equal right for everyone which side would you be favoring?

The Zionists that would take all of the land, and the Muslims that would 'drive the Jews into the sea' are equally wrong.

None of the parties have a right to Jerusalem alone.

Originally posted by ArchAngel

It was stolen in the 1967 Israeli Sneak Attack.

Once again, there are those in the Arab world who seek to rewrite history and impute expansionist motives to Israel, but the facts are clear.

Here's a quick summary of some of the major events leading up to the Six-Day War: (*)

• On May 16, 1967, Cairo Radio announced: "The existence of Israel has continued too long. The battle has come in which we shall destroy Israel." On the same day, Egypt demanded the withdrawal of UN forces that had been stationed in Gaza and Sharm el-Sheikh since 1957. Three days later, the UN announced it would comply with the Egyptian demand.
  
  
• On May 19, 1967 Cairo Radio said: "This is our chance, Arabs, to deal Israel a mortal blow of annihilation..."
  
  
• On May 23, 1967 Egypt's President Gamal Abdel Nasser declared his intention to block the Strait of Tiran to Israeli shipping, thus effectively severing Israel's vital trade links with East Africa and Asia. Israel replied that under international law this was a casus belli, an act of war.
  
  
• On May 27,1967 Nasser said that "our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel."
  
  
• On May 30,1967 Jordan's King Hussein placed Jordanian forces under Egyptian control. Egyptian, Iraqi, and Saudi troops were sent to Jordan.
  
  
• On June 1, 1967 Iraq's leader added his thoughts: "We are resolved, determined, and united to achieve our clear aim of wiping Israel off the map."
  
  
• On June 3, 1967 Cairo Radio hailed the impending Muslim holy war.
  
  
• On June 5, Israel, surrounded by Arab forces likely to attack at any moment, launched a preemptive strike.
  
  
  Events leading to the Six Day War- 1967 (**)
  
  Milhemet Sheshet Hayamim - The Six Day War begun. Yes - within six days, Israel had defeated its adversaries and, in the process, captured land on the Egyptian, Jordanian, and Syrian fronts.
  
  Shortly after the Six-Day War, Israel indicated its desire to negotiate peace with its Arab neighbors. While Israel was unprepared to relinquish the eastern half of Jerusalem
  
  
  Wednesday, June 7, 1967 - The Kotel = western wall of the Temple Mount --IDF Chief Rabbi, General Shlomo Goren with Torah Scroll and Shofar (***)
  
  
  it was willing to exchange the seized territories for a comprehensive settlement. But Israel's overtures were rebuffed. An unmistakable response came from Khartoum, Sudan's capital, where Arab leaders issued a resolution on September 1, 1967 announcing the three noes:
  
  
• no peace
  
• no recognition
  
• no negotiation"
  
  
  
  
  
  
  (*) MORE: Israel and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A Brief Guide for the Perplexed
  
  (**) MORE: Events leading to the Six Day War, 1967
  
  (***) MORE: 1967 and the Six-Day War

Originally posted by ArchAngel


The Zionists that would take all of the land,

That is a good joke.

You might be interested in this topic: ATSNN: Leaving Gaza

I don't want to drift off topic but............

Originally posted by ArchAngel
Point the finger on the ones that are responsible.

This was the result of the Israeli 1967 Sneak Attack, and failure to withdraw according to US Resolutions.

1967 War

There should have been no suprise that Israel attacked when it did. The writing was on the wall, to use a very appropriate saying. Ii was only a matter of who would move first.

The "finger" should be pointed at Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq. They started all the events in motion that led to the Six Day War. Are we in another state of denial? Make no mistake about who caused the war.

......... OK, Back on Topic

"Why does most of the Arab/Islamic world deny Jews/Israel belong in the Middle East"

We have made it this far without falling into the "free fire zone" Please refocus on the topic of the thread. I know there is a lot a baggage that goes with the Arab/Israeli conflict. And now we move on.........

Originally posted by CarlosG

Plus muslims have the doctrine that once a land is conquered by muslims, if it is lost, they can never rest until it is re-conquered.

Really? Do they want Spain back?

Yes, they do.

Hamas: Our Main Goal Is to Establish a Great Islamic State


You remember the "Jewel of the Middle East" and the "Golden Land" ?

Arab Empire of c. 750:




and Ottoman Empire of around 1580:

(source: Valhalls TA-911: Al-Qaeda's Goal of al Khalifa )


.

Why do they deny the right of existence? Because they despise the Jew; it is written into their beliefs, just as it is written that to lie to the infidel is nothing more than strategy. This is why one must know the truth so that one will not fall for the lie. If you are told enough times that a peaceful, small nation of good, hard-working people are a threat to not only the region but the entire world, you might start to believe it if you don't have the truth in your head and heart.

While we are going down this path, let us also keep in mind that nearly 80% of the Jewish National Home (League of Nations creations) was taken and given to the Arabas as TransJordan.
Jewish settlement was barred. With Egyot taking Gaza, Israel was left with a bare 17.5%.

Indeed, why is it that the Arab world cannot stand the thoughts of the Jewish people having a sliver of land? Why is it thatthey are willing to make sure that the "Palestinian" people are not absorbed, but are kept in place so as to be used as a political chip when dealing with Israel, and to use them as vessels of shrapnel death for the women and children of Israel?

Spare me the malarkey.

Indeed, why is it that the Arab world cannot stand the thoughts of the Jewish people having a sliver of land? Why is it thatthey are willing to make sure that the "Palestinian" people are not absorbed, but are kept in place so as to be used as a political chip when dealing with Israel, and to use them as vessels of shrapnel death for the women and children of Israel?

Very interesting words here.

Absorbed in what way.

Israel is not allowing them to be absorbed into their nation, nor allowing the land to be absorbed by he Arab states that owned it before Israel invaded in a sneak attack.

By supporting the Palestinians being 'kept in place' the Arab nations are standing against THE ETHNIC CLEANSING OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE.

What is it that you propose?

Kicking out all of the non-Jews in the West Bank, and giving all of the land to Israel all the while expecting that the Palestinians should be glad that they are no longer a tool of Arab nations?

This is how I understand it- from the things I've read anyhow. I delve any deeper into the fact checking so feel free. When moses freed the Jews Everyone had to walk around lost in the desert for a while. They had sinned or something. Well, the jews got tired of walking I guess and decided to return home...to Israel. By now the Muslims have enjoyed living there for a long time. The Jewish believe that 'Mount Sanai' or whatever is where Moses received the X commandments and The Torah? But, the Muslims believe this is where Muhammad ascended into heaven. Hence, the Holy War.

~I take full responsibility for all grammatical & punctuation error. *K

And I've read it has a lot to do with specific water rights and who controls it.

*K

Originally posted by ArchAngel

THE ETHNIC CLEANSING OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE.

Ethnic cleansing: Do you mean the Jews from the GazaStrip?

If not, since you already said this several times before and I provided statistics about the growth of the Muslim population (16.1 percent in 2004, in comparison to 15.2 percent in 2000), I would like to I would like to point you to what I've already posted on 1-11-2005.

You could also look up the world factbook the population growth rate in the Westbank = 3.13% (2005 est.)

This is far away from ethnic cleansing, right?

Originally posted by ArchAngel

Kicking out all of the non-Jews in the West Bank, and giving all of the land to Israel all the while expecting that the Palestinians should be glad that they are no longer a tool of Arab nations?

what?

Nobody wants to kick the Palestinians out of the Westbank.

PM Sharon’s Speech at the United Nations Assembly - September 9, 2005:


[...]

The right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel does not mean
disregarding the rights of others in the land.

The Palestinians will always be our neighbors.

We respect them, and have no aspirations to rule over them.

They are also entitled to freedom and to a national, sovereign existence in a state of their own

[...]

*******************************

In the case of the West Bank (and Gaza) no internationally recognized sovereign control previously existed.

Describing The Territories as "Palestinian" or as "stolen land" may serve the political agenda of one side in the dispute, but represents a total denial of Israel's fundamental rights.

Under UN Res 242, Israel is only expected to withdraw "from territories" to "secure and recognized boundaries" and not from "the territories" or "all the territories" captured in the Six-Day War.

Taken together with UN Res. 338, it becomes clear that only negotiations would determine which portion of these territories would eventually become "Israeli territories" or territories to be retained by Israel's Arab counterpart.

Originally posted by Riwka

Israel's Nationality Law relates to anyone wishing to settle in Israel, as well as those already residing or born there, regardless of race, religion, creed, sex or political beliefs.

Citizenship may be acquired by:

Birth

The Law of Return

Residence

Naturalization

.......

I assume this info comes from here.

If you read it do you even understand it?

Lets take a closer look at it, and understand what it means in application today.

Acquisition of nationality by birth

This is pretty straight forward, and to be expected.

Jews, Muslims, Christians, and anyone else are Israelies if born to an Israeli parent.

Acquisition of Nationality according to the Law of Return

This is racist to the core.

The Law of Return allows only Jews to immigrate.

Acquisition of Nationality by Residence

This applies to everyone that resided in Mandate Palestine before the 1948 war and in Israel until 1952.

The kink in this is that Israel did not allow the non-Jews who fled in fear of their lives to return to their homes and their land.

Right of Return for the non-Jews, which was one of the conditions for Israel to become a UN member, has never been honored.

Acquisition of Nationality by Naturalization

This gives the Jewish Minister of the Interior the power to grant citizenship almost with a free hand.

So you can only be an Israeli citizen if you or your parents did not flee before the Stern Gangs reign of terror in fear of your life.

Or if the Jewish Minister of the Interior says so.

Or if you are Jewish.

No non-Jews immigrate, even if they had lived in what is today Israel during the British Occupation, and even owned land there.


ONLY JEWS CAN IMMIGRATE


How can you say with an honest face that this is not discriminatory?

Originally posted by pavil
Given the latest outburst from the Iranian President I really have to wonder about the denial of the Arab world in regards to the existance of Jews in the Middle East.

I know the history of "we were here first, no WE were here first", I just don't get the implication that many Arab leaders seem to give that the Jewish people never had a nationstate there. The historical evidence is just too great to deny that the Kingdom of Israel at one time existed in the general region of where the Current state of Israel is currently.

Why is this historical fact seemingly glossed over by the Arab world? I know the Modern day feelings on both sides inflame things but I just have never "gotten" the denial of most of the Arab world when it comes to Jews having a history/place in the Middle East. I'm sure I am beating a dead and already pulverized horse but I would like to hear a rational answer for the this.

We didn't deny The state of Jews at all But we did deny the state of Israel and there is a big difference.
When we gave Jews as Jews the chance to have part of Palestine as in Share some of the land , All we got in return is what you see now. They named Palestine Israel .Killed its history and People.
Second: Israel doesn't belong there. Israel is a matter of of Name - For example: What Americans did to Native Americans -using the same mentality. Changing The real history of Indians and Named It AMERICA.
.
.
.
Lets compare:
And this is what a white folk said:

From A History of New York, 1809

Let us suppose, then, that the inhabitants of the moon, by astonishing advancement in science, and by profound insight into that lunar philosophy, the mere flickerings of which have of late years dazzled the feeble optics, and addled the shallow brains of the good people of our globe-let us suppose, I say, that the inhabitants of the moon, by these means, had arrived at such a command of their energies, such an enviable state of perfectibility, as to control the elements, and navigate the boundless regions of space. Let us suppose a roving crew of these soaring philosophers, in the course of an aerial voyage of discovery among the stars, should chance to alight upon this outlandish planet.

And here I beg my readers will not have the uncharitableness to smile, as is too frequently the fault of volatile readers when perusing the grave speculations of philosophers. I am far from indulging in any sportive vein at present; nor is the supposition I have been making so wild as many may deem it. It has long been a very serious and anxious question with me, and many a time and oft, in the course of my overwhelming cares and contrivances for the welfare and protection of this my native planet, have I lain awake whole nights debating in my mind, whether it were most probable we should first discover and civilize the moon, or the moon discover and civilize our globe. Neither would the prodigy of sailing in the air and cruising among the stars be a whit more astonishing and incomprehensible to us than was the European mystery of navigating floating castles, through the world of waters, to the simple natives. We have already discovered the art of coasting along the aerial shores of our planet, by means of balloons, as the savages had of venturing along their sea-coasts in canoes; and the disparity between the former, and the aerial vehicles of the philosophers from the moon, might not be greater than that between the bark canoes of the savages, and the mighty ships of their discoverers. I might here pursue an endless chain of similar speculations; but as they would be unimportant to my subject, I abandon them to my reader, particularly if he be a philosopher, as matters well worthy of his attentive consideration.

To return then to my supposition­let us suppose that the aerial visitants I have mentioned, possessed of vastly superior knowledge to ourselves; that is to say, possessed of superior knowledge in the art of extermination riding on hyppogriffs­-defended with impenetrable armor--armed with concentrated sunbeams, and provided with vast engines, to hurl enormous moon-stones: in short, let us suppose them, if our vanity will permit the supposition, as superior to us in knowledge, and consequently in power, as the Europeans were to the Indians, when they first discovered them. All this is very possible; it is only our self-sufficiency that makes us think otherwise; and I warrant the poor savages, before they had any knowledge of the white men, armed in all the terrors of glittering steel and tremendous gunpowder, were as perfectly convinced that they themselves were the wisest, the most virtuous, powerful, and perfect of created beings as are, at this present moment, the lordly inhabitants of old England, the volatile populace of France, or even the self-satisfied citizens of this most enlightened republic.

Let us suppose, moreover, that the aerial voyagers, finding this planet to be nothing but a howling wilderness, inhabited by us poor savages and wild beasts, shall take formal possession of it, in the name of his most gracious and philosophic excellency, the man in the moon. Finding, however, that their numbers are incompetent to hold it in complete subjection, on account of the ferocious barbarity of its inhabitants, they shall take our worthy President, the King of England, the Emperor of Hayti, the mighty Bonaparte, and the Great King of Bantam, and returning to their native planet, shall carry them to court, as were the Indian chiefs led about as spectacles in the courts of Europe.

Then, making such obeisance as the etiquette of the court requires, they shall address the puissant man in the moon, in, as near as I can conjecture, the following terms:

"Most serene and mighty Potentate, whose dominions extend as far as eye can reach, who rideth on the Great Bear, useth the sun as a looking glass, and maintaineth unrivaled control over tides, madmen, and sea-crabs We thy liege subjects have just returned from a voyage of discovery, in the course of which we have landed and taken possession of that obscure little dirty planet, which thou beholdest rolling at a distance. The five uncouth monsters, which we have brought into this august presence, were once very important chiefs among their fellow savages, who are a race of beings totally destitute of the common attributes of humanity; and differing in every thing from the inhabitants of the moon, inasmuch as they carry their heads upon their shoulders, instead of under their arms­have two eyes instead of one­are utterly destitute of tails, and of a variety of unseemly complexions, , particularly of horrible whiteness­instead of pea-green.

"We have moreover found these miserable savages sunk into a state of the utmost ignorance and depravity, every man shamelessly living with his own wife, and rearing his own children, instead of indulging in that community of wives enjoined by the law of nature, as expounded by the philosophers of the moon. In a word, they have scarcely a gleam of true philosophy among them, but are, in fact, utter heretics, ignoramuses, and barbarians. Taking compassion, therefore, on the sad condition of these sublunary wretches, we have endeavored, while we remained on their planet, to intro duce among them the light of reason­and the comforts of the moon. We have treated them to mouthfuls of moonshine, and draughts of nitrous oxide which they swallowed with incredible voracity, particularly the females; and we have likewise endeavored to instill into them the precepts of lunar philosophy. We have insisted upon their renouncing the contemptible shackles of religion and common sense, and adoring the profound, omnip otent, and all perfect energy, and the ecstatic, immutable, immovable perfection. But such was the unparalleled obstinacy of these wretched savages, that they persisted in cleaving to their wives, and adhering to their religion, and absolutely set at naught the sublime doctrines of the moon nay, among other abominable heresies, they even went so far as blasphemously I to declare, that this ineffable planet was made of nothing more nor less than green cheese!"

At these words, the great man in the moon (being a very profound philosopher) shall fall into a terrible passion, and possessing equal authority over things that do not belong to him, as did whilom his holiness the Pope, shall forthwith issue a formidable bull, specifying, "That, whereas a certain crew of Lunatics have lately discovered, and taken possession of a newly discovered planet called the earth-and that whereas it is inhabited by none but a race of two-legged animals that carry their heads on their shoulders instead of under their arms; cannot talk the lunatic language; have two eyes instead of one; are destitute of tails, and of a horrible whiteness, instead of pea-green-therefore, and for a variety of other excellent reasons, they are considered incapable of possessing any property in the planet they infest, and the right and title to it are confirmed to its original discoverers.­And furthermore, the colonists who are now about to depart to the aforesaid planet are authorized and commanded to use every means to convert these infidel savages from the darkness of Christianity, and make them thorough and absolute lunatics."

In consequence of this benevolent bull, our philosophic benefactors go to work with hearty zeal. They seize upon our fertile territories, scourge us from our rightful possessions, relieve us from our wives, and when we are unreasonable enough to complain, they will turn upon us and say, Miserable barbarians! ungrateful wretches! have we not come thousands of miles to improve your worthless planet; have we not fed you with moonshine; have we not intoxicated you with nitrous oxides; does not our moon give you light every night, and have you the baseness to murmur, when we claim a pitiful return for all these benefits? But finding that we not only persist in absolute contempt of their reasoning and disbelief in their philosophy, but even go so far as daringly to defend our property, their patience shall be exhausted, and they shall resort to their superior powers of argument; hunt us with hyppogriffs, transfix us with concentrated sunbeams, demolish our cities with moonstones; until having, by main force, converted us to the true faith, they shall graciously permit us to exist in the torrid deserts of Arabia, or the frozen regions of Lapland, there to enjoy the blessings of civilization and the charms of lunar philosophy, in much the same manner as the reformed and enlightened savages of this country are kindly suffered to inhabit the inhospitable forests of the north, or the impenetrable wildernesses of South America.

Thus, I hope, I have clearly proved, and strikingly illustrated, the right of the early colonists to the possession of this country; and thus is this gigantic question completely vanquished: so having manfully surmounted all obstacles, and subdued all opposition, what remains but that I should forthwith conduct my readers into the city which we have been so long in a manner besieging? But hold; before I proceed another step, I must pause to take breath, and recover from the excessive fatigue I have undergone, in preparing to begin this most accurate of histories. And in this I do but imitate the example of a renowned Dutch tumbler of antiquity, who took a start of three miles for the purpose of jumping over a hill, but having run himself out of breath by the time he reached the foot, sat himself quietly down for a few moments to blow, and then walked over it at his leisure.

Washington Irving

[edit on 10-3-2006 by MsPalestinian08]

Originally posted by MsPalestinian08

We didn't deny The state of Jews at all But we did deny the state of Israel and there is a big difference.

There is no difference, you just try to play with words. The name of the jewish State is Israel.

Originally posted by MsPalestinian08

They named Palestine Israel .

And rightly so. Why let the name of the Jewish State be the name some old Romans decided? There is no reason.

Most of the people (70%) living in Jordan call themselves Palestinians, and Jordan was part of the old british Mandate.

external image-external image
The British Mandate & the Seperation of Transjordan 1922

IF they would like to rename this part in Palestine, they should go for it. Furthermore, we also have the Palestinian Authority today, which will be a Palestinian state in the future.

Originally posted by MsPalestinian08

Changing The real history of Indians and Named It AMERICA.

And there is the a difference: Jews and arab people have always been there, there never has been a reason to change a single thing.

Miss Palestinian, you are a bit late to the party. The facts have been layed out with documenting facts starting from the time when the Romans renamed the area in the attempt to erase the memory of the Jews in that area to date.

What it does boil down to is that once any land belongs to the Islamic relious/political system, it must always be as such. It makes no difference who owned it before or for how long or when, if it was ever under Islamic control, it must either remain as such or return to Islamic control.

Israel is no different. Not as far as the Jihadists are concerned.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Miss Palestinian, you are a bit late to the party. The facts have been layed out with documenting facts starting from the time when the Romans renamed the area in the attempt to erase the memory of the Jews in that area to date.

What it does boil down to is that once any land belongs to the Islamic relious/political system, it must always be as such. It makes no difference who owned it before or for how long or when, if it was ever under Islamic control, it must either remain as such or return to Islamic control.

Israel is no different. Not as far as the Jihadists are concerned.

Facts of what? The truth? You make up the truth -pretend like its history. Then keep adding to it. Like what the Zionists are doing now. They are trying to build up history under the grounds of Jerusalem so when it comes to the truth- They will supposibly pretend there was an An Israel but of course thats not what they show on Media. Since Zionists control all The U.S .... SO Please Don't even go there.

No, actually, I do not make up the truth; I simply give it to you as it is. Have you read the many hours of postings, or do you simply pop in, state the same old, stale accusations that are tossed about without reading?

The usual BS accusation as always - the Jews control the U.S.!
If they controlled th eU.S., I would think they would have more influence, rather than allowing the Wahhabists have all the control!

Reality seems to not back up the statements you make. Please explain. A good place to explain this would be in the topped thread of this forum started by Subz. That way we do not go off on a snipe hunt in this thread!





[edit on 11-3-2006 by Thomas Crowne]