Muslim Zionism, The Road To Peace?

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 12:15 AM
link   
As some of you may know, the seemingly unanimously hostile attitude to Jewish Zionism from the Islamic community has been questioned from within, and is still so.

Excerpt from Wikipedia:


According to British-based imam Muhammad Al-Hussaini, traditional commentators from the eighth and ninth century onwards have uniformly interpreted the Qur'an to say explicitly that the Land of Israel has been given by God to the Jewish people as a perpetual covenant.[4][5]. Hussaini bases his argument upon Qur'an (Sura - added by OP) 5:21 in which Moses declares: "O my people, enter the Holy Land which God has prescribed for you, and turn not back in your traces, to turn about losers." He cites the Qur'an commentator Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, who says that this statement is "a narrative from God … concerning the saying of Moses … to his community from among the children of Israel and his order to them according to the order of God to him, ordering them to enter the holy land." He argued that this promise to the Jews is ever lasting, and further said: "It was never the case during the early period of Islam … that there was any kind of sacerdotal attachment to Jerusalem as a territorial claim." This interpretation of the promise to the Jews as ever-lasting is not uniformly accepted by all Islamic commentators [6]


Further:



According to Sheikh Prof. Abdul Hadi Palazzi, originally the Sunni position, represented by the then Sharif of Mecca al-Hussein and later by his son, the King Feisal of Hijaz and then of Iraq, was openly pro-Zionist, while the Wahhabi one was extremely anti-Zionist.[8]


en.wikipedia.org...

Ultimately the Wahhabi stance prevailed, the same Wahhabism that today uses Saudi oil money to build Wahhabi mosques and madrasas all over the world, preaching a dogmatic reading of Islam and anti-Zionism.

Here's an interesting article on Sheikh Palazzi:

www.jpost.com...

Equally, certain parts of the Sura 2 (The Cow) is interpreted as in favor of this reading of the Qu'ran:


38 O ye children of Israel! Remember my favours which I have favoured you with; fulfil my covenant and I will fulfil your covenant; me therefore dread. Believe in what I have revealed, verifying what ye have got, and be not the first to disbelieve in it, and do not barter my signs for a little price, and me do ye fear. 39 Clothe not truth with vanity, nor hide the truth the while ye know. 40 Be steadfast in prayer, give the alms, and bow down with those who bow. 41 Will ye order men to do piety and forget yourselves? Ye read the Book, do ye not then understand? 42 Seek aid with patience and prayer, though it is a hard thing save for the humble, 43 who think that they will meet their Lord, and that to Him will they return. 44 O ye children of Israel! Remember my favours which I have favoured you with, and that I have preferred you above the worlds. 45 Fear the day wherein no soul shall pay any recompense for another soul, nor shall intercession be accepted for it, nor shall compensation be taken from it, nor shall they be helped.


Imagine if... the Islamic nation finally could learn to live with a non-Islamic nation within its sphere of interest, just like Europe has learnt to live with Bosniac and Albanian muslims. No more 'Holy War' to re-take 'Islamic' land, and Jerusalem. The Muslim nations all recognize Israel's existence, a peace-deal is brokered with Syria and Iran (Ahmadinejad becomes the new men's room sanitary supervisor of the Hilton Teheran}, Israel and the Palestinian authorities work out a two state-solution, Israel drops its aggressive muscle attitude and becomes a peaceful commerce-based industrial nation, 'Palestine' integrates the Arab world and becomes another petty Kingdom state, dominated by its neighbor Jordan.



edit on 11/24/2012 by tothetenthpower because: --Mod Edit--Using Content From Other Sites -- Use EX Tags.




posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heliocentric

Imagine if... the Islamic nation finally could learn to live with a non-Islamic nation within its sphere of interest, just like Europe has learnt to live with Bosniac and Albanian muslims. No more 'Holy War' to re-take 'Islamic' land, and Jerusalem. The Muslim nations all recognize Israel's existence, a peace-deal is brokered with Syria and Iran (Ahmadinejad becomes the new men's room sanitary supervisor of the Hilton Teheran}, Israel and the Palestinian authorities work out a two state-solution, Israel drops its aggressive muscle attitude and becomes a peaceful commerce-based industrial nation, 'Palestine' integrates the Arab world and becomes another petty Kingdom state, dominated by its neighbor Jordan.


Whenever the "beast of the earth" consciousness of the 'thinker' 'thinks' of a "solution" to a problem, it always 'thinks' in terms of duality; a two-state solution, for example. That is the meaning of the terms "speaks with the voice of the dragon".

And, if you read the writings of J. Krishnamurti, you will understand that duality is the source of conflict and violence; that duality will never result in an end to violence, except, perhaps, only on a temporary basis.

In other words, the "two-state 'solution'" is not any solution at all.

The conflict over Jerusalem is a conflict over whether Revelation is non-dualistic or dualistic.

And the fact that both the Israel and the Palestinians 'think' that that will solve the problem means that that is precisely not the real solution.

The real solution is the one state solution and the non-division of Jerusalem.

The one state solution would see all Arabs and Jews within Palestine represented in the Knesset; the one state solution would see the Jews of Palestine taking responsibility for the horrors that they have inflicted upon the Arabs and Palestinians in Palestine and compensating them for those horrors.

The one state solution would see the end to the divisions between Judaism, Christianity and Islam through the realization that Moses, Isaiah, Daniel, Jesus and Mohammed all received the Vision which is referred to as the Vision of the "Son of man" as well as the Revelation of the "resurrection"; and that the Torah implies the Doctrine of 'Rebirth', while the other prophets and Jesus specifically taught a Doctrine of 'Rebirth'.

Of course, the "beast of the earth" consciousness of the 'thinker'-theologians and the 'thinker'-politicians is doing everything that it possibly can to prevent the genuine resolution of this problem with the "dead man walking" "peace process".

An entirely different view of this conflict, interestingly enough, is provided in the 17th Column of the Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light.

But, of course, the Revelations in that Scroll have been censored and suppressed by the religious 'authorities' and the media officials since the discovery of that Scroll was first made public in 1947.

Michael Cecil



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 01:53 AM
link   
When I first saw the thread title my first thought was to say something like "that's like putting antimatter and matter together".

But I must say a darn good argument is made here that it is possible. A friend of mine was trying to get the details out of the "Big 3" (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) because she was raised in China where religion is pretty much buggered. Anyway, she had a hard believing me when I told her that the first 5 books of the Holy Bible could be found (at least in ideas if not text) in the holy texts of the other two.

Here is my problem though and this situation exemplifies it completely. The problem with organized, group-taught, religion is that a small cadre can choose what it deems as holy and then feed it to the rest. The Holy Bible is an example of this and it was in the latter half of the first thousand years AD that they were chosen. Here we see a small cadre (relative to Islam I mean) that has imposed by some method a way of thinking that goes against what their holy text says to do.

Honestly the best path for religion is the individualistic approach where each person builds their relationship with (insert name of holy entity here) and fellowship would be in the form of helping others both in the classic sense and in the sense of helping their relationship with (insert name of holy entity here).

And to the inevitable atheist poster who attacks religion in general, I am not interested in your pamphlet on not believing, thank you.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 02:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sir Solomon
When I first saw the thread title my first thought was to say something like "that's like putting antimatter and matter together".

But I must say a darn good argument is made here that it is possible.


No. It is not a "darn good argument".

No, it is not possible.

Not.

Not possible.

Only a 'thinker' would 'think' that a dualistic solution is a genuine solution.

The ultimate conflict is the conflict over Jerusalem; which is the manifestation of the conflict over Revealed Truth.

The Muslims are, of course, in error when they say that the "Night Journey" of Mohammed was "to Jerusalem" as the basis for their rationale that they should have control over Jerusalem.

That term is a reference to the Vision of the "Son of man", which demonstrates the continuity of Revelation between the Torah, the Prophets, Daniel, the Gospels (including at least the Gospels of Thomas and Mary), the Revelation of John and the Koran.

And it is only on the basis of that understanding that there can be any genuine resolution of the conflict over Jerusalem.

Michael Cecil



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 02:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 

I don't think there is any RELIGIOUS claim that muslims have to the land that is now known as Israel, but that was never the point.

The point is that the Palestinians have a right to live there because that is where they lived. They owned land, they had been there for hundreds of years, etc.
The jews who legally obtained land also have a right to live there.

But when you start talking about right of owning land because of blood, or because of religion, or because of an ancient book, things get confusing. It gets even MORE troublesome when one starts talking about owning land AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS.

The jews certainly have a fundamental human right to exist, to live in peace and to not be harassed. They can do this all over the world, or they can do it in the lands they are supposedly ancestrally linked to. I'm not sure how this translates into the right for a Jewish state where an immigrant jewish minority undemocratically enforces a jewish majority government while oppressing the actual local arab majority, but hey, it exists now, so what can you do?

I dunno. But if the solution those muslim zionists are actually is that muslims move out of their homeland, and "Give it up for Israel", then they are being remarkably naive.

[edit on 20-7-2010 by babloyi]



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
reply to post by Heliocentric
 

I don't think there is any RELIGIOUS claim that muslims have to the land that is now known as Israel, but that was never the point.

The point is that the Palestinians have a right to live there because that is where they lived. They owned land, they had been there for hundreds of years, etc.
The jews who legally obtained land also have a right to live there.

But when you start talking about right of owning land because of blood, or because of religion, or because of an ancient book, things get confusing. It gets even MORE troublesome when one starts talking about owning land AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS.

The jews certainly have a fundamental human right to exist, to live in peace and to not be harassed. They can do this all over the world, or they can do it in the lands they are supposedly ancestrally linked to. I'm not sure how this translates into the right for a Jewish state where an immigrant jewish minority undemocratically enforces a jewish majority government while oppressing the actual local arab majority, but hey, it exists now, so what can you do?[edit on 20-7-2010 by babloyi]


No one has a "right" to anything--the land, life, "to exist", anything.

The whole doctrine of "human rights" has been concocted by the "beast of the earth" consciousness of the 'thinker' as an 'alternative' to the Moral Law.

Forget about "rights'.

Live in accordance with the Moral Law.

You know, simple things like: Thou shalt not steal; Thou shalt not murder; Thou shalt not turn the Revelations received from the Creator upside down with the Satanic thoughts of the "beast of the earth"-'thinker' Jewish, Christian and Muslim theologians.

Michael Cecil



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 04:08 AM
link   
Religion is at the root of all the problems in this world.

Until people stop blindly following millennium-old words to define rtheir lives we are screwed.

[edit on 7/20/2010 by jonny2410]



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 04:16 AM
link   
First of all, a big thank you to you all.

I hesitated between posting this thread in the Middle East Issues forum and here,

I more or less expected it to be hanging from a meat-hook by now, but instead I discovered intelligent and reasoning replies.

I think I made the right choice.

Michael Cecil, I do know J. Krishnamurtis' writings. I am in general very influenced by the Vedic texts, and try to apply myself to its way of life.

The 'outcome' I sketched is not my 'ideal' solution, but one I threw out there kind of like a hot potato to stir things up.

My ideal solution would be global consciousness, that we all think as one, and with the rest of the Universe.


Originally posted by babloyi
reply to post by Heliocentric
 

I don't think there is any RELIGIOUS claim that muslims have to the land that is now known as Israel, but that was never the point.

The point is that the Palestinians have a right to live there because that is where they lived. They owned land, they had been there for hundreds of years, etc.
The jews who legally obtained land also have a right to live there.

But when you start talking about right of owning land because of blood, or because of religion, or because of an ancient book, things get confusing. It gets even MORE troublesome when one starts talking about owning land AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS.

The jews certainly have a fundamental human right to exist, to live in peace and to not be harassed. They can do this all over the world, or they can do it in the lands they are supposedly ancestrally linked to. I'm not sure how this translates into the right for a Jewish state where an immigrant jewish minority undemocratically enforces a jewish majority government while oppressing the actual local arab majority, but hey, it exists now, so what can you do?

I dunno. But if the solution those muslim zionists are actually is that muslims move out of their homeland, and "Give it up for Israel", then they are being remarkably naive.

[edit on 20-7-2010 by babloyi]


Yes, you are right. The Palestinians have a right to live where they live, they have a right to the land that their forefathers worked and lived on.

And since the UN has decided that a Palestinian state should be created, I believe that should be done too.

The argument about 'religious right' to a land is a lofty one, and the Palestinian cause went totally wrong when it swung from claiming human rights to 'God's' right (well, I'm generalizing here, but...).

As you know, Israel is a secular state, and there's not much about God in its constitutional texts. Which is why - to an extent - orthodox Jews do not recognize Israeli law - except when it corresponds with the Torah.

Then again, Jewish claims to the Levant isn't just religious. As an archaeologist by profession, with more than 20 years of field work in this region, I can tell you the following.

There has always been a Jewish population living in Palestine and in Jerusalem, from early iron-age to the present. This population has sometimes been smaller or larger, depending on whatever military force or empire occupied the area, but they were always there. Archaeology as well as historical and demographic records prove it.

Therefore, Jews are not 're-claiming' something they never left, although they have re-formed a state that was taken away from them by the Romans.

I have no problem with European Jews living in Israel or Palestine.

There are - as of now - more North African Muslims living in France than European Jews (or descendants of) living in Israel or the 'controlled territories'. These Muslims have no whatsoever cultural, religious or historical connection to France (other than that France colonized their countries a century ago) and were not persecuted in their countries (except for the Harkis), while the European Jews left Europe because of persecution and ill-treatment, to make a living in the land their ancestors originated from.

If we do not question the Muslim minorities living in Europe (and I don't), then we should not question those 'European' Jews living in Israel.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 05:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heliocentric

Equally, certain parts of the Sura 2 (The Cow) is interpreted as in favor of this reading of the Qu'ran:

38 O ye children of Israel! Remember my favours which I have favoured you with; fulfil my covenant and I will fulfil your covenant; me therefore dread. Believe in what I have revealed, verifying what ye have got, and be not the first to disbelieve in it, and do not barter my signs for a little price, and me do ye fear. 39 Clothe not truth with vanity, nor hide the truth the while ye know. 40 Be steadfast in prayer, give the alms, and bow down with those who bow. 41 Will ye order men to do piety and forget yourselves? Ye read the Book, do ye not then understand? 42 Seek aid with patience and prayer, though it is a hard thing save for the humble, 43 who think that they will meet their Lord, and that to Him will they return. 44 O ye children of Israel! Remember my favours which I have favoured you with, and that I have preferred you above the worlds. 45 Fear the day wherein no soul shall pay any recompense for another soul, nor shall intercession be accepted for it, nor shall compensation be taken from it, nor shall they be helped.


And, if you read just a little further in Sura 2 of the Koran (thanks, honey--see further information on my webpage) you will read the following:

"Say: 'Whoever is an enemy of Gabriel' (who has by Allah's grace Revealed to you the Koran as a guide and joyful tidings of the faithful, confirming previous Scriptures) 'whoever is an enemy of Allah, His angels, or His apostles, or of Gabriel or (thanks honey--sometimes I can't see "f"s for "r"s) Michael, shall make Allah Himself his enemy: Allah is the enemy of the unbelievers.'"

"angels" refers to Gabriel.

"apostles" refers to Michael.

And, if you read the Book of Daniel 12:1, you will read: "And at that time shall Michael..."

And, in another place in the Koran it states that every prophet spoke of one who would come after him.

Michael & Elizabeth Cecil



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by jonny2410
Religion is at the root of all the problems in this world.

Until people stop blindly following millennium-old words to define rtheir lives we are screwed.

[edit on 7/20/2010 by jonny2410]


Just my point.

Religion is the problem.

Revelation is the solution to the problems created by religion.

But there are, of course, over ten thousand religious 'authorities' and media officials who do not want that to be publicized.

Michael Cecil



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 06:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heliocentric
First of all, a big thank you to you all.

I hesitated between posting this thread in the Middle East Issues forum and here,

I more or less expected it to be hanging from a meat-hook by now, but instead I discovered intelligent and reasoning replies.

I think I made the right choice.

Michael Cecil, I do know J. Krishnamurtis' writings. I am in general very influenced by the Vedic texts, and try to apply myself to its way of life.

The 'outcome' I sketched is not my 'ideal' solution, but one I threw out there kind of like a hot potato to stir things up.

My ideal solution would be global consciousness, that we all think as one, and with the rest of the Universe.


Well, the term "global consciousness" really has no meaning to me.

The non-dualistic consciousness I refer to as the "observing consciousness" which comprises a good part of the observations of J. Krishnamurti but was something that he never specifically articulated.

This is the same consciousness referred to in Genesis as was "Created by and in the image of God" (Genesis 1:27).

After looking at this for quite some time, my terminology is that the consciousness Created by and in the image of God is a 2-dimensional 'flat' space observing consciousness which, through the 'movement' of self-reflection, differentiates into a 3-dimensional 'curved' space consciousness of a "self", which is then maintained over time through the postulation of the thought and the thoughts of the 'thinker'; the consciousness of the "self" being symbolized as both the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" in Genesis 3 and the "beast of the sea" in the Revelation of John 13:1, and the thinker being symbolized by the 'clothing' warn by Adam and Eve in Genesis 3 and as the "beast of the earth" in the Revelation of John 13:11.

The "serpent" (Genesis 3), "Satan"(the Gospels) and the "dragon" (the Revelation of John12) is, then, a symbol for the 'movement' of self-reflection which is the origin of the duality.

J. Krishnamurti, as far as I can see, considers the thoughts of the 'thinker' to be the origin of the duality; and has nothing to say about the 'movement' of self-reflection.

Michael Cecil



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 

Hello again, Helioscentric!

You are right, if any Palestinian is using so-called religious right as a reason to be on their land, then that is plain silly. I have only really seen the "religious right" thing on the Jewish side, though (except of course when they are using "religious right" as an extension of their human rights....).

I don't know if Israel can validly claim to be a secular state, as it repeatedly calls itself a JEWISH State (I believe it is unlawful in Israel to deny that it is a Jewish state). This might have been okay if "Jewish" was defined as an ethnic group (not a definition I agree with, but whatever), but it is not. An "ethnically" (but not religiously) jewish person is not eligible to the Law of Return (and by extension, citizenship) if they practise a religion other than Judaism.

Anyhow, it has made it perfectly clear that while most of the people under the control of Israel are muslim, they will never allow them to be the majority. While they do have their political parties, they are with practically no power at all- represented with I think only 10 seats in Knesset (with a total of 120 seats) which is far out of proportion to the actual population. Then we have the issues with marriage (especially inter-faith marriages) and citizenship.

There certainly always have been jews who lived in the Palestinian area, and like everyone else, they have a right to be there. But the existence of local jews, who have been living there for hundreds of years doesn't (in my mind, anyhow), solidify any right of immigrant jews who HAVEN'T lived in the area for hundreds and hundreds of years to come in. Note I say "right". Sure, they CAN come, and can settle down (if they are all nice and legal), but I don't see it as a "right". Same way as it isn't a "right" of a Lenape indian to get land in NY because some have been living there for hundreds and hundreds of years.

I'd also say being colonised by a country certainly gives you a historical link to that country. But the difference is that France doesn't use religious (or ethnoreligious) criteria when considering whether a person is eligible to be a citizen of their country. But anyhow, I don't "question" the immigrant jews living in Israel (unless they are illegally occupying land, or actively pushing for expansion and more colonies). I may consider their having come there in the first place a mistake, but unfortunately, they've been there for a while now, and just telling them to get lost won't work.

Anyhow, sorry for the huge off-topic!


[edit on 20-7-2010 by babloyi]



posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sir Solomon
The problem with organized, group-taught, religion is that a small cadre can choose what it deems as holy and then feed it to the rest. The Holy Bible is an example of this and it was in the latter half of the first thousand years AD that they were chosen. Here we see a small cadre (relative to Islam I mean) that has imposed by some method a way of thinking that goes against what their holy text says to do.


I agree totally with you on this,

You use the Bible as an example of this, fair enough.

I don't even consider the Bible as a religious doctrine from start. It's more of an encyclopedia, which started off with the Sumerian creation myths (assuming here that the Sumerian mythology sprung out of the Sumerian civilization, and wasn't 'inherited' from an earlier civilization), which the early Hebrews picked up and made their own.

Hebrew scholars then added the Judaica, their own history, the prophets and the prophesies, and their relationship to a certain god named Yahweh. I do believe that Judaism started out as a henotheistic religion, that is a culture who knew that there were many different gods and types of divine beings (they certainly learned that from the Sumerian culture, which they knew well since they adopted their creation myths), but was chosen by the God Yahweh to become 'his' people.

Levite priests then edited, 'arranged' the Torah into a political, religious text, in which they play a central role since they're under the direct command of Yahweh, the only God.

Christianity (New Testament) then further radicalizes the concept of monotheism (ads a divine son, a virgin mother and a holy ghost, but still keeps it kind of monotheistic) , and Islam even more so (gets rid of the son, the virgin mother, and keeps it strictly One God, one Prophet and some semi divine beings), because of its very aggressive stance towards the polytheism from which it has its roots ("slay the polytheists wherever you find them" as the Qu'ran says).

The Bible and the Qu'ran are politicized texts that are and have been used to shape their civilizations.



posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   
Such forward thinking would require the Muslim culture to review itself and it's teachings, to perhaps realize the fundamentalism and tyranny that permeates substantial portions of their faith and state-governments is wrong. This will not happen anytime soon.



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gainsayer
Such forward thinking would require the Muslim culture to review itself and it's teachings, to perhaps realize the fundamentalism and tyranny that permeates substantial portions of their faith and state-governments is wrong. This will not happen anytime soon.


Yes, I agree with you on this,

It's hard enough for politicians to admit they botched up, so for religious leaders who believe they act on a mandate from God even more so,

Add to the fact that the strictly spiritual aspects of Islam (like Sufism) is loosing ground, while the aggressive, conservative, theocratic Wahhabi sect is constantly growing more powerful - even in traditionally secular Muslim countries such as Turkey and Indonesia, thanks to Saudi oil money. They will never accept this type of reading of the Qu'ran. They've got the power, and the money to enforce their ideas.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Another example from the Koran, the so called surah Al Isra, or the Night Journey :

[101-104] And We gave to Moses nine Signs which were quite manifest.113 Now you yourself may inquire from the children of Israel about it: when those Signs came before Pharaoh, he uttered these very words: “O Moses, I consider you to be a bewitched man.”114 Moses replied, “You know it full well that none but the lord of the Heavens and the earth had sent down these signs as eye-openers,115 and O Pharaoh, I consider you indeed to be a doomed person.”116 At last Pharaoh resolved to uproot Moses and the Israelites from the land but We drowned him and his followers all together. Then we said to the Israelites, “Now you should settle down in the land117 and when the prescribed time of Resurrection comes about, We will gather all of you together.”

www.englishtafsir.com...

Notice how the (Muslim) comment on this text omits that it is Allah who speaks and explicitly tells the Israelites to settle down in the Land, but prefers to angle it as if they (Moses and his followers) simply ¨settled the land¨.

Even thought the Koran is - to a Muslim - the undisputable word and law of God, the interpretation of the text can apparently be scewed to fit with whatever political and nationalist agenda desired.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   
There is a basic misunderstanding on this thread, to Muslims Moses is a MUSLIM. Muslims believe the Promises to Abraham also belong to them. They(at least their literate scholars) believe the Land of Palestine belongs to Islam, and this belief was reaffirmed most recently by Saladin when he drove off the invaders. For them this is just another Crusade by the West using European jewish proselytes as settler/merceneries.



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by GeneralMishka
 


Congratulations GeneralMishka,

In the eight minutes between my post and yours you managed to read the entire thread, verify the quotes and interpretations of and make up your personal opinion on it, and write an answer.

That is the fastest intellectual work I've seen in a long time!

edit on 24-11-2012 by Heliocentric because: so very still, even cherry blossoms are not stirred by the temple bell



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Muslim Zionism, The Road To Peace?,

The only real 'road to peace' is the one that is paved with deprogramming people from being myopic in the organized religions. Deprogram. Educate. Learn that this is 2012 and that the planet is a very small place.

IMHO



posted on Nov, 24 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heliocentric
reply to post by GeneralMishka
 


Congratulations GeneralMishka,

In the eight minutes between my post and yours you managed to read the entire thread, verify the quotes and interpretations of and make up your personal opinion on it, and write an answer.

That is the fastest intellectual work I've seen in a long time!

edit on 24-11-2012 by Heliocentric because: so very still, even cherry blossoms are not stirred by the temple bell



Really about 2 minutes, it took me 6 minutes to roll my eyes, put some dishes away & make coffee
edit on 24-11-2012 by GeneralMishka because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join