Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Israeli apartheid

Options
1…2223242527

Comments

  • Options
    #782
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    ..no offence, but there really is no reason to go down the religous road here.


  • Options
    #783
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    irishconvert wrote: »
    Anymore, your analysis of the Qur'an is inaccurate. The Qur'an does not recognise the Land of Israel as the heritage of the Jews

    When the Qur'an refers to Israelites, or Children of Israel, it is referring to the people at the time of Moses who believed in the teaching of Moses and believed on one true God, i.e. they had the same beliefs as Muslims today, they were Muslims. Muslims believe that these Children of Israel are not the Jews of today as they have gone astray and their book, the Torah, has been changed. The Children of Israel were the people of the time who believed in the same message as was revealed to Muhammed in the Qur'an. In other words the people who will come together in Israel at the end of time will be Muslims.
    Thank you for your reply.
    Firstly it is not my analysis other than the final comments.
    SHAYKH PROF. PALAZZI who I think is an islamic scholar provided the quote in bold. i have seen other references to this validation and must try to find them again.
    " i.e. they had the same beliefs as Muslims today, they were Muslims."
    This bit i find very hard to accept ! As a member of a religion founded around 700 AD you are trying to disenfranchise Jewish people living today !
    Even the Christians couldnt do that to the Jewsih people and expect to have credibility.
    So what are Jewish people of today ? Imposters ?
    This really is deserving of a separate thread; do you think so ?


  • Options
    #784
    irishconvert
    Registered Users Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭irishconvert


    anymore wrote: »
    Thank you for your reply.
    Firstly it is not my analysis other than the final comments.
    SHAYKH PROF. PALAZZI who I think is an islamic scholar provided the quote in bold. i have seen other references to this validation and must try to find them again.
    " i.e. they had the same beliefs as Muslims today, they were Muslims."
    This bit i find very hard to accept ! As a member of a religion founded around 700 AD you are trying to disenfranchise Jewish people living today !
    I am not trying to do anything. This is what the Qur'an teaches us. I am just passing the message on :-)
    anymore wrote: »
    Even the Christians couldnt do that to the Jewsih people and expect to have credibility.
    So what are Jewish people of today ? Imposters ?
    We believe that both the Christians and Jews have had their religion changed by vested interests, corrupt leaders, etc. If it was perserved as it was delievered it would be the same message as Islam. For example the trinity is an investion of the Council of Nicea.
    anymore wrote: »
    This really is deserving of a separate thread; do you think so ?
    Only if you have alot of time to fill.


  • Options
    #785
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    anymore wrote:
    This really is deserving of a separate thread; do you think so ?
    irishconvert wrote: »
    Only if you have alot of time to fill.

    anymore is right - this is deserving of a separate thread, and in the Religion forums. It's not appropriate here.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #786
    joesoap007
    Closed Accounts Posts: 152 ✭✭joesoap007


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwlJKzecHko


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #787
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    joesoap007 wrote: »
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwlJKzecHko

    This is relevant how?


  • Options
    #788
    Salvation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 299 ✭✭Salvation


    irishconvert wrote: »
    Anymore, your analysis of the Qur'an is inaccurate. The Qur'an does not recognise the Land of Israel as the heritage of the Jews

    When the Qur'an refers to Israelites, or Children of Israel, it is referring to the people at the time of Moses who believed in the teaching of Moses and believed on one true God, i.e. they had the same beliefs as Muslims today, they were Muslims. Muslims believe that these Children of Israel are not the Jews of today as they have gone astray and their book, the Torah, has been changed. The Children of Israel were the people of the time who believed in the same message as was revealed to Muhammed in the Qur'an. In other words the people who will come together in Israel at the end of time will be Muslims.

    COUGH COUGH BULLSH1T HEAD OVER TO ONE OF YOUR DICTATOR COUNTRIES AND BRING YOU DIETRIBE OF ISLAMFASCIST CRAP WITH YOU.


  • Options
    #789
    irishconvert
    Registered Users Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭irishconvert


    Salvation wrote: »
    COUGH COUGH BULLSH1T HEAD OVER TO ONE OF YOUR DICTATOR COUNTRIES AND BRING YOU DIETRIBE OF ISLAMFASCIST CRAP WITH YOU.

    Congratulations on your contributon to this thread, give yourself a pat on the back :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #790
    Warper
    Registered Users Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭Warper


    It really is, from a humanitarian point of view and a moral view it really amazes me how Israel gets away with its current blockade on Gaza. The UN is powerless, no-one seems to give a sh1t and yet the whole world knows what is going on. It is disheartening to think that this sort of stuff can still go on in the world. I know people will always create war, that is inevitable but at least they usually come to some conclusion and move on. Not a prolonged blatant systematic abuse of human rights as is so evident in Gaza that the whole world can see and nothing can/wont be done.


  • Options
    #791
    nacho libre
    Registered Users Posts: 16,661 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/10191339.stm

    "We strongly oppose efforts to single out Israel, and will oppose actions that jeopardise Israel's national security"

    No other nation in the Middle East has nuclear weapons, so how is this singling Israel out. It is deeply hypocritical to sanction and isolate one country on the unfounded supposition they are building a nuclear bomb, then another country, which has nuclear weapons, is basicially allowed to tell the rest of world get stuffed and Obama slavishly defends them.

    So much for Obama's message of change and not letting lobby groups heavily influence his policies!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #792
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    Yeah, calling out the only country in the Middle East, who has Nuclear weapons and hasn't signed the NPT (which for all Irans, faults they have signed, and there is still no evidence of a weapons program from them), isn't singling it out, in the context of a document calling for a Nuclear free Middle East. Its basically common sense, and the US's complaint about it make even less sense, considering the context. Also, last time I checked, Iran is being sanctioned due to the NPT for its non-compliance in certain area's. So it seems to me that Iran is already being dealt with under the NPT, where as Israel has not even signed it, and are complaining about Iran's non-compliance, stinks of a huge amount of hypocrisy on there part.

    While, India and Pakistan were not mentioned either, neither of those countries are in the Middle East, but rather South Asia, so again it would make sense not to mention them, considering the context of the document.


  • Options
    #793
    Mr. SS
    Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭Mr. SS


    nacho libre wrote: »
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/10191339.stm

    "We strongly oppose efforts to single out Israel, and will oppose actions that jeopardise Israel's national security"

    No other nation in the Middle East has nuclear weapons, so how is this singling Israel out. It is deeply hypocritical to sanction and isolate one country on the unfounded supposition they are building a nuclear bomb
    Because Israel is not threatening to wipe other countries off the map. When you make such claims -as Iran's leader has- it tends to get people to stand up and take notice and as Iran are far from compliant with inspections it duely and fairly raises suspicions about it.

    Anyway start a new thread if you wish to talk about nuclear bombs and the like.


  • Options
    #794
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Salvation wrote: »
    COUGH COUGH BULLSH1T HEAD OVER TO ONE OF YOUR DICTATOR COUNTRIES AND BRING YOU DIETRIBE OF ISLAMFASCIST CRAP WITH YOU.

    Permabanned for religious attack.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #795
    nacho libre
    Registered Users Posts: 16,661 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    Mr. SS wrote: »
    Because Israel is not threatening to wipe other countries off the map. When you make such claims -as Iran's leader has- it tends to get people to stand up and take notice and as Iran are far from compliant with inspections it duely and fairly raises suspicions about it.

    .

    Except he didn't threaten to wipe Israel off the map.
    It seems no matter how many time such claims are comprehensively debunked they'll be repeated again after a period of time has elapsed.
    Also, Iran is a signature to the NPT - which Israel is not, and there is no proof that Iran is after the bomb.
    I can only assume your reluctant to acknowledge these things is motivated by bias. Otherwise you might have to concede that there is a blatant double standard at play.


  • Options
    #796
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    On 25 April 2010, the State Attorney's Office informed the High Court of Justice that it intended to consider approving the looting of land and unlawful construction involved in the establishment of the Derekh Ha’avot outpost, adjacent to the Elazar settlement in the Etzion Bloc. This statement follows nine years in which the state declared that construction in the outpost was carried out illegally. The statement also indicates that the state is ignoring its obligations under the Road Map, which was authorized by the government, to freeze construction in settlements and prohibit expropriation of Palestinian land and expansion of the settlements’ built-up areas. The State Attorney's Office's announcement was made in its response to a petition filed by Peace Now and residents of the adjacent Palestinian village of al-Khader, who claim that the outpost was built on village land.
    http://www.btselem.org/English/Settlements/20100505_License_for_looting_in_Derekh_Haavot_outpost.asp

    Of course all settlements are illegal under international law anyway, however we see here that even Israeli law can be ignored or kicked into touch when expansionism demands it.


  • Options
    #797
    Mr. SS
    Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭Mr. SS


    nacho libre wrote: »
    Except he didn't threaten to wipe Israel off the map.
    the left leaning new york times seems to think he did: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/26/world/africa/26iht-iran.html

    I dont see how my conclusion is bias when a paper I rarely agree with is claiming this.


  • Options
    #798
    Mr. SS
    Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭Mr. SS


    irishconvert wrote: »
    If it was perserved as it was delievered it would be the same message as Islam.
    Thank god it wasn't, I like my free speech just the way it is!


  • Options
    #799
    nacho libre
    Registered Users Posts: 16,661 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    Mr. SS wrote: »
    the left leaning new york times seems to think he did: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/26/world/africa/26iht-iran.html

    I dont see how my conclusion is bias when a paper I rarely agree with is claiming this.

    the same new york times that cravenly beat the drum for the Iraq war in its editorial?

    this is what he said:
    "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

    That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word "Regime", pronounced just like the English word with an extra "eh" sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase "rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods" (regime occupying Jerusalem).

    So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want "wiped from the map"? The answer is: nothing. That's because the word "map" was never used. The Persian word for map, "nagsheh", is not contained anywhere in his original Persian quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase "wipe out" ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran's President threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", despite never having uttered the words "map", "wipe out" or even "Israel"

    The full quote translated directly to English: "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".


  • Options
    #800
    Euroland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 634 ✭✭✭Euroland


    jhegarty wrote: »
    The difference is no one can agree on who was there first.

    It was very clear cut in South Africa , Europeans came and ran the natives off their land.

    In the middle east each side have been kicking the other off their land for at least 2000 years.

    Jews began to arrive only in 1895, mostly from Eastern Europe, many of them from the start were involved in terrorist activities against arabs.


  • Options
    #801
    Euroland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 634 ✭✭✭Euroland


    Mr. SS wrote: »
    Because Israel is not threatening to wipe other countries off the map.

    It is not threatening, yes. It is just conducting genocide against Palestinians day after day, month after month, year after year.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #802
    comeraghs
    Registered Users Posts: 957 ✭✭✭comeraghs


    Euroland .... you might find that there were a few Jews around the place in or about 2000 years ago too!


  • Options
    #803
    Selkies
    Closed Accounts Posts: 483 ✭✭Selkies


    Euroland wrote: »
    Jews began to arrive only in 1895, mostly from Eastern Europe, many of them from the start were involved in terrorist activities against arabs.

    there were approximately 6000 Jewish people living in Israel at around 1880 when the Russian pogroms and the Zionist movement contributed toward mass immigration.

    I've never actually heard about the terrorist activities of immigrants against the local population. Can you provide me with a link?

    I do remember that the Zionist movement ruled that no land be bought from indigenous people but rather from Ottoman landlords. The land was bought at well over what it was worth and was mostly swamp land and desert. Check out Mark Twain's quote on the "Holy Land"

    It wasn't until 1927 during the British rule when the mufti of Jerusalem appointed by the British that the racial conflict began.


  • Options
    #804
    Mr. SS
    Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭Mr. SS


    nacho libre wrote: »
    The full quote translated directly to English: "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".
    Your honestly spliting hairs between "must vanish from the page of time" and "wipe off the map"? The difference between them is the difference between "i will kill you" and "I will end your life", its trivial at best. He obviously endorses it if he is quoting it.

    The fact remains Iran is consistantly posturing agressively towards Israel, to the detriment of both Israel and arab countries who wish not to see Iran get more powerful.

    ***He also denies the holocaust and says it was created to help the jews, so your claims of him not being anti-semetic or anti-israel are incredible. His rethoric against Zionism is rethoric against Israel as Zionism created Israel.***


  • Options
    #805
    Mr. SS
    Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭Mr. SS


    Euroland wrote: »
    Jews began to arrive only in 1895, mostly from Eastern Europe, many of them from the start were involved in terrorist activities against arabs.
    Oh my god Euroland, with your information I have now established that Jesus was an illegal immigrant, how dare he be there before 1895.


  • Options
    #806
    Mr. SS
    Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭Mr. SS


    Euroland wrote: »
    It is not threatening, yes. It is just conducting genocide against Palestinians day after day, month after month, year after year.
    Jordan has killed more palestinians than Israel ever has. You should look up genocide by the way.


  • Options
    #807
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    Mr. SS wrote: »
    Your honestly spliting hairs between "must vanish from the page of time" and "wipe off the map"? The difference between them is the difference between "i will kill you" and "I will end your life", its trivial at best. He obviously endorses it if he is quoting it.

    The fact remains Iran is consistantly posturing agressively towards Israel, to the detriment of both Israel and arab countries who wish not to see Iran get more powerful.

    There is a huge difference, as Iran were calling for regime change, which lots of other countries like Israel and the US do all the time for example.


  • Options
    #808
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    Mr. SS wrote: »
    Oh my god Euroland, with your information I have now established that Jesus was an illegal immigrant, how dare he be there before 1895.

    What are you on about? Zionist colonists, did start to arrive, in the late 1800's, this is well established fact. There entire claim to the land is a 2000 year old claim, from someones holy book. Which has about as much validity as me claiming France is mine, because I had a dream where God gave it to me.


  • Options
    #809
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Mr. SS wrote: »
    Jordan has killed more palestinians than Israel ever has. You should look up genocide by the way.

    That was dealt with in detail on this board before. I'd suggest having a re-read of the facts.


  • Options
    #810
    nacho libre
    Registered Users Posts: 16,661 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    Mr. SS wrote: »
    Your honestly spliting hairs between "must vanish from the page of time" and "wipe off the map"? The difference between them is the difference between "i will kill you" and "I will end your life", its trivial at best. He obviously endorses it if he is quoting it.

    The fact remains Iran is consistantly posturing agressively towards Israel, to the detriment of both Israel and arab countries who wish not to see Iran get more powerful.

    ***He also denies the holocaust and says it was created to help the jews, so your claims of him not being anti-semetic or anti-israel are incredible. His rethoric against Zionism is rethoric against Israel as Zionism created Israel.***

    it's not splitting hair to say there is a vast difference between calling for regime change and calling for the destruction of an entire people. As Wes points out Iran are not alone in doing so.

    by the way i don't think i've maintained in any of my posts that Ahmadinejad isn't anti-semitic or that he doesn't have perverse views on the holocaust. if you are going to reply to my posts don't make phantom charges.

    that the Iranian president has nauseating views on the holocaust and is a bigot is not up for debate, but your claim that he wants to get rid of an entire people does not stand up to scrutiny. You do realise Iran has a Jewish population - the biggest in the middle east outside of Israel?

    as for saying Iran's stance is aggressive, who are the countries conducting war games in the straits of hormutz based on unfounded allegations. can you imagine the reaction if Iran, after the 2003 war in Iraq, started conducting war games off the coast of america? yet you portray the current situation as if Iran is being the aggressor here and threatening stability in the region.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #811
    Mr. SS
    Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭Mr. SS


    wes wrote: »
    There is a huge difference, as Iran were calling for regime change, which lots of other countries like Israel and the US do all the time for example.
    I do not for one second believe that a holocaust denyer believes in "regime change" as in just the government. He was refering to zionist regime. The regime that governs jerusalem. Your intelligent people, dont be so naive to think he is calling for a simple change in government when he consistently refers to the "zionist regime", for example:
    We have reliable information ... that the Zionist regime is after finding a way to compensate for its ridiculous defeats from the people of Gaza and Lebanon's Hezbollah"
    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSDAH12274820100211

    Zionist regime effectively means Israel by any other name, it does not mean a particular party or government in israel. You all know this, he himself makes no bones about it, openly saying this is what he believes, yet you all try to say this is not what he means, that his true message is lost in translation???
    Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Sunday said that the existence of "the Zionist regime" is an insult to humanity, according to Iranian news agency IRNA... The Iranian president ended his speech by suggesting a referendum on the destruction of Israel."

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/ahmadinejad-zionist-regime-is-an-insult-to-humanity-1.263879

    Ahmadinejad is perfectly clear in his speech, trying to cause ambiguity by whether he said "off the map" or "wipped from the pages of history" or "regime change" is irrelevant, the message is crystal clear.


Advertisement