www.islam-watch.org

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Is Israel an Apartheid State?

E-mail Print PDF

There is absolutely no way to call Israel an "apartheid state", because it doesn't treat its religio-racial minorities -- namely Arab Muslims, Christians and Druze -- in a discriminatory manner that warrants such a label. There is no such complaint. Instead, Israel's Islamic Arab neighbour states deserve such an identification.


The Israeli Apartheid Week – observed annually in February-March on University Campuses in the West – is here again. This is an occasion for condemning Israel as an apartheid state, targeted at its delegitimization as a nation-state.

The Israeli Apartheid Week was born out of the 2001 UN Conference UN Conference on Racism and Discrimination in Durban, South Africa, which Yasser Arafat attended as a distinguished guest. The conference, dominated by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and the Palestinian leadership, adopted a declaration, calling Israel “a racist, apartheid state” practicing “crime against humanity.” Since then, it has become an annual anti-Israel hate-fest on University and College campuses across the West.

It should be noted that this is a continuation of the effort to delegitimize the statehood of Israel internationally, which started with adoption of the UN resolution UNGA 3379 in 1975, branding “Zionism as racism”. Ridiculous as it was, the resolution was thoroughly discredited and repealed in 1991 in a new resolution (UNGA 46/86).

Now as the 2012 edition of the Israeli Apartheid Week is ongoing, Professor Efraim Karsh, a renowned historian, wrote an opinion article, entitled The Middle East’s real apartheid, in which he discussed (1) Religious intolerance, (2) Ethnic inequality, (3) Racism, (4) Gender discrimination, (5) Denial of citizenship, (6) Labor inequality, (7) Slavery, and (8) Political Oppression practiced in Israel and Islamic Arab states of the Middle East, and concluded that in these respects, Israel is free of apartheid and that the Islamic Arab states are the real outposts of apartheid in that religion.

When a blogged Karsh’s article on my Website, islam-watch.org, with the title Which is the Apartheid State in the Middle East: Arab Countries or Israel?, it, as expected, angered the Muslim readers. But unable to refute Karsh’s well-documented and -reasoned opinion, one Muslim, named Malem, commented: “Definition is -- A policy or system of segregation or discrimination on grounds of race. Israel does this each day with Arabs from Philistine.

Another reader, code-named Muslim and Proud, supported Malem, saying: “I think you will find that the Islamaphobes regard Israel to be very peaceful and tolerant.... The civilised world does not live in cloud cuckoo land and is aware of how Israel deals with the Palestinians.

And Mr. Malem retorted: “Very True, I cannot understand how they deny the land of Philistine to the Philistines, quite odd.

Israel – An Apartheid State?

The question is:

  • Is Israel truly an Apartheid state?
  • Is it at all odd to disagree with branding Israel an apartheid state?

The answer is indisputably “no”, which I will make crystal-clear below.

Mr. Malem’s copy-pasted definition of apartheid is correct. But apartheid becomes relevant when a state treats different sections of its own people differently based on racial/religious differences. So, the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians (Philistines) cannot be considered apartheid, because Palestinians are not citizens of the state of Israel. If one wants to determine whether Israel is truly an apartheid state, he/she has to examine how Israel treats it own citizens of minority communities – namely the Muslim Arabs, Christians, and Druze etc. in comparison to its Jewish majority.

The authors of branding Israel an apartheid state have never made that judgement based on the Israeli state’s treatment of its Muslim Arab, Christian, and Druze citizens; it has been based on Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

So, the basis on which Israel has been labelled an “apartheid state” is clearly and absolutely groundless.

Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, an extra-Israeli people, can be called unjustified aggression or such things, but not apartheid.

Israeli Treatment of the Palestinians

Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians should be seen in the context that they are a people dedicated to Israel’s destruction, and they have made every possible attempt to achieve that goal by waging repeated wars (in alliance with their Arab friends) and campaign of terrorism. So, to Israel, the Palestinians or the territories of Gaza and West Bank, are clearly an “enemy entity or outpost” – resolved to its annihilation. Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians should be judged in that context.

How would Saudi Arabia or another Muslim state of the Middle East react had a Christian or Jewish people right across its border, like Palestinians are right across Israel’s border, sought annihilation of that Islamic state, and waged similar wars and terror campaigns to achieve that goal?

How did America react when the Taliban-aided Islamic al-Qaeda terrorists attacked targets in New York and Washington, although not really as a campaign to annihilate the state of America?

Israel never denied a state to the Palestinians (Philistines)

The claim that Israelis deny and have denied statehood to the Palestinians is another foul plot, aimed at delegitimizing the statehood of Israel in front of the largely uninformed international community.

Israel has never denied statehood to the Palestinians. But the opposite is true, as made clear above.

The fact is: The Jews of the region have said “yes” on every occasion when proposal for a Palestinian state was put forward.

And there is already a Palestinian state, namely Jordan, which was created by dividing the former Land of the Children of Israel, aka Palestine, which was brutally occupied by the Islamic Arab invaders at the birth of Islam (630s).

So, the great majority of the Philistines already have a state, and the Israelis have happily recognized it, never denied, even though they had to evacuate all the Jewish citizens, who were living in that part of the Land of Israel (Palestine).

The problem with the Muslims of Gaza and the West Bank is that they could easily merge with their Palestinian brothers of Jordan, or they could have formed a state of their own alongside the state of Israel. But they didn’t and remained committed to destruction of Israel and extermination of its Jewish population.

After Israel’s creation, based on the 1947 UN Partition Plan (UNGA 181), Gaza and the West Bank were occupied by Egypt and Jordan respectively during the 1948 Palestinian-Arab war to destroy Israel. And they lived under the Egyptian-Jordanian occupation until 1967, never making any complaint against their Arab-Islamic occupiers. Instead of waging campaigns of terrorism against Egypt and Jordan, their true occupiers, they targeted their campaign of terrorism for the annihilation of Israel and extermination of the Jews – both in Israel and abroad.

As concerns the statehood of the Philistines of Gaza and West Bank, they were offered a second Philistini state three times: 1) by the Peel Commission (1937), 2) by the UN (1947), and 3) by the US-mediated Palestine-Israeli negotiations (2000). And every time, the Israelis said “yes”, but the Palestinians rejected it, because they wanted annihilation of the state of Israel and exterminate its resident Jews to create a Palestinian state that included all of the Israeli land. And, to achieve that goal, they have repeatedly waged wars and continued terrorist campaigns against Israel since its creation in 1948.

Conclusion

  1. Israel is not an apartheid state, because there is no such complaint regarding Israel’s treatment of its religio-racial minorities, namely Arab Muslims, Christians or Druze.
  2. Israel's treatment of Palestinians can in no way qualify as apartheid, because Palestinians of Gaza and West Bank are not part of Israeli state.
  3. Israel's treatment of the Palestinians should be seen as a sovereign state's treatment toward its avowed enemies from across the border, seeking its destruction and genocide of its people.
  4. It is a patently false claim that Israelis have denied Palestinians their statehood. Israeli have already happily recognized a Palestinian state, namely Jordan, comprising vast parts of the historical Israel/Palestine. And the Israelis have also said "yes" to every proposal of another Palestinian state for the Muslims of Gaza and West Bank. The Palestinians have, repeatedly, self-denied themselves a state.
Comments (38)Add Comment
0
...
written by duh_swami , March 07, 2012
Reading up on Philistines in Wikidpedia, it is pretty obvious that Philistines have nothing in common with modern 'Palestinians'...Philistines worhipped Baal, Astarte, Dagon...No where is Allah mentioned...it's doubtful any 'Palestinian' is a direct descendant of Philistines...Wikid say's their language is mostly unknown, but some researchers thought they spoke some variation of Indo-European...At any rate, none of this sounds the least bit like modern 'Palestinians', who didn't exist prior to 1967...And I didn't see where any property rights were mentioned...
0
...
written by joy , March 07, 2012
Do you know the meaning of philistine. "A crass priggish individual guided by material rather than intellectual or artistic values". Crass means insensitive to other people's feelings and prig is thief. What an apt one word description for Muslim.
0
@ Mr Khan
written by Muslim & Proud , March 07, 2012
Here is an in depth analysis of the crimes committed by Israel. Enjoy.

http://www.palestine-encyclopedia.com/EPP/TOC.htm

"It is written by ISSA NAKHLEH who was a Palestinian Christian, born in the Shepherd's Field in Palestine. He was a graduate of the London University (LL.B. ) and a Barrister at Law of the on our able Society of Lincoln's Inn, London. He was a member of the Palestine Bar and a member of many Bar associations in the Arab World.

He represented the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine in New York City 1947-1948. He was a Representative of The League of Arab States in Latiin America, with an office in Buenos Aires, Argentina 1956-1957, with the rank of Minister Plenipotentiary."
0
@ M & P
written by Editor, M A Khan , March 07, 2012
If you want to discuss the subject matter of this article, then do comment.

No people are saint. Muslims -- starting with its prophet Muhammad -- have committed thousands of times worse crimes than committed the Jews. Followers of Issa Sheikh's religion, the Christians, have committed nearly as horrible crimes against humanity, and particularly against the Jews.

And you should know what "Arab Higher Committee for Palestine" was. It was an association of Arab Muslims and Christians, who opposed the creation of Israel and sought expulsion of the Jews from there.
0
@ Mr Khan
written by Muslim & Proud , March 08, 2012
This is what you said in the opening statement of your article Mr Khan:

There is absolutely no way to call Israel an "apartheid state", because it doesn't treat its religio-racial minorities -- namely Arab Muslims, Christians and Druze -- in a discriminatory manner that warrants such a label.


You said that Israel does not treat the minorities IN A DISCRIMATORY manner.

The Encydlopedia is full of all the crimes committed by Israel over the last x number of decades.

Your position has now changed to:

No people are saint.


Here is some free advice: Do all your research BEFORE writing an article. This way, you are less likely to make a complete fool of yourself.
0
M&P
written by Clement-Islam- Watch Pastor , March 08, 2012
"Here is some free advice: Do all your research BEFORE writing an article. This way, you are less likely to make a complete fool of yourself. "

Who is actually making a fool of himself here. You are here only to call people names without making any rational point or defense of poli-cum religious cult belief system called Islam.

Everyone one knows that Israel is the only democratic state in the whole of the middle East. No democracy threat human indiscrimatley except in defense of their territorial integrity.

Israel is fighting for existence, Palestinians are figthing for religion, for Islam. They blow themselves with bombs to land in paradise. Israel kill to keep their citizens alife.

The scinarios are different.,

0
M & P
written by Editor, M A Khan , March 08, 2012
Committing a crime doesn't always make a state apartheid.

Apartheid happens when a state chooses one race over all others and segregate and deprives the other races.

And punishing terrorists and those, who want a state's destruction are crimes to some, but not to others.

And for your edification, Muslims are banned from using burqa in come European countries, including France, they are prevented from building mosques and raising minarets, and mosques and Muslim students campuses are spied upon in America. These discriminations doesn't make those countries apartheid.
0
Clement
written by Malem , March 08, 2012
It is quite curious that you lambaste Muslim&Proud for name calling, yet you partake in the same type of actions. One would think if you are going to try and correct or critique anothers behavior you yourself would not be partaking in that same behavior your are criticizing.

Mr Khan, but they do segregate, that is why when a new illegal outpost is developed into a new developed village there no longer remains any of the arabs who's land it is. Seems that would fit into your definition above. Now if not apartheid, then surely highly discriminatory, not a crime as you say, but also not the behavior of a moral state.
0
@ Mr Khan
written by Muslim & Proud , March 08, 2012
Please check this link for a report from someone who actually spent time in Jerusalem (4 years) as well as South Africa (10 years)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/feb/06/southafrica.israel
0
Doctor So sweet
written by duh_swami , March 08, 2012
It is quite curious that you lambaste Muslim&Proud for name calling, yet you partake in the same type of actions.

It is quite curious, sweet Doctor that you continue to lambaste kuffar for name calling while you give your brother one free pass after another...Your bias is glaring...What name did Clement call him?
0
Malem
written by Clement-Islam- Watch Pastor , March 08, 2012
Was the above post actually meant for me?

Here I try to be issue base as much as possible except where someone is behaviing in an obvious manner in which case I have no obtion but to call him the way I perceive him to be.

At any case I call your prophet and Quran names because that is what your scriptures discribed them to be.

when your scriptures describe what your prophet did and it was exactly what a thief does we call him a thief and if it was assassination we have no any other name but to call him an assassin, and when he acted like a false prophet who say do as I say but don't do as I do, we call him a false prophet and so on and so forth so what is the name calling here?
0
Clement
written by duh_swami , March 08, 2012
Malman, the sweetest, uses others name calling as a sort of weapon...As long as he can accuse others, he does not have to explain anything...Malman has never satisfactorily explained anything as far as I can tell, he always responds with twisted superficiality, obfuscation, tu quequo (others do it to), distractions and deviousness...all in the name of defending Islamic evil and dark fairy tales...
He's not very good at it from lack of talent, but he does try...
0
Mr Pastor
written by Muslim & Proud , March 08, 2012
when your scriptures describe what your prophet did and it was exactly what a thief does we call him a thief and if it was assassination we have no any other name but to call him an assassin, and when he acted like a false prophet who say do as I say but don't do as I do, we call him a false prophet and so on and so forth so what is the name calling here?


Please confirm from your scriptures where your lord and saviour used this pronciple to call people names?

Good luck.
0
M&P
written by Clement-Islam- Watch Pastor , March 08, 2012
"Please confirm from your scriptures where your lord and saviour used this pronciple to call people names? "

Is ok let me give you a few:

Mat 23:13-22” ¶ But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.

15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! 17 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? 18 And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty. {guilty: or, debtor, or, bound}

19 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?

20 Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon.

21 And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein.

22 And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.

23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.”

25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
0
Clement
written by duh_swami , March 08, 2012
Your going to overload the sweet Muslims mind Clement, his wiring will heat up and the insulation will start melting...
0
Children
written by Malem , March 08, 2012
Can we not get back to the discussion at hand rather than allow oneself to be dragged into a banter of name calling? It does nothing to help further the discussion or ones cause.
0
Du-Swami
written by Clement-Islam- Watch Pastor , March 08, 2012
Just leave me and them, they don't know what holy indignation means. They don't know that open rebuke is better than secret love. They want us to make them feel comfortable in their ocultic book called the Quran.

They want us to pet them.

They have repent and leave that evil book or else we will keep them on the edge.
0
Mr Pastor
written by Muslim and proud , March 08, 2012
You failed - try again. Allow me to remind you of your principle

"when your scriptures describe what your prophet did and it was exactly what a thief does we call him a thief and if it was assassination we have no any other name but to call him an assassin, and when he acted like a false prophet who say do as I say but don't do as I do, we call him a false prophet and so on and so forth"

All of the verses you quoted do not, anywhere, refer to the analysis of any scriptures by your lord and saviour.

Have another go

Cheers
0
M&P
written by Clement-Islam- Watch Pastor , March 08, 2012
"All of the verses you quoted do not, anywhere, refer to the analysis of any scriptures by your lord and saviour. "

Please read those scriptures again, it appears you have problem with comprehension, invite Du-Swami to school or even your brother Malem can school. of who are the hypocrites!, and blind guide are in Jesus rebuke of the religious people like you
0
Aromatic tobacco sweet Doctor?
written by duh_swami , March 08, 2012
Can we not get back to the discussion at hand rather than allow oneself to be dragged into a banter of name calling?

Hallucinating sweetest Doctor? Point out the name calling on this thread...
0
Mr Pastor
written by Muslim & Proud , March 08, 2012
You need to understand your own principle, here it is:

"when your scriptures describe what your prophet did and it was exactly what a thief does we call him a thief and if it was assassination we have no any other name but to call him an assassin, and when he acted like a false prophet who say do as I say but don't do as I do, we call him a false prophet and so on and so forth"

So you are calling someone:

1 - A thief
2 - An Assasin
3 - A false Prophet

Based upon their scriptures.

Now please confirm where your Lord and Saviour used this principle and called people names after reading their scriptures?

Cheers.
0
@Muslim and Proud
written by Proud Infidel , March 08, 2012
"You need to understand your own principle, here it is:"

You are in no position whatsoever to talk about others' prinicples. Before you start telling people to understand theirs, perhaps you should consider understanding your own since the majority of Muslims don't, or they wouldn't be followers of Islam.
0
@ Malem
written by Editor, M A Khan , March 08, 2012
I didn't name-call anybody. I don't call anybody liar, pig, idiot and such things. I guess you understand what name-calling means.
Mr Khan, but they do segregate, that is why when a new illegal outpost is developed into a new developed village there no longer remains any of the arabs who's land it is.
I hope, you have taken note of my earlier reference that Muslim Arabs of Israel also don't allow settling of Jews in areas they live in. So, it's a mutual thing happening in Israel. If the Jews segregates, Muslims segregate too.

And concerning your saying that "a new illegal outpost is developed into a new developed village there no longer remains any of the arabs who's land it is" -- you be mindful that Arabs occupied the land of Palestine in the 630s, which in true sense belong to the Jews and Christians, who lived there before the coming of the Islamic invaders. Similarly, Medina, Khaybar, Mustaliq, parts of Medina are Jewish lands, which Muhammad army occupied through barbaric cruelties. Not only that, at the time of the birth of Israel, no less than 75% of the world's Jewish population lived today's Islamic world -- in Damascus, Alexandria, Persia, Turkey, North Africa. Muslims have occupied their lands and possessions in those places, and they have been kicked out.
0
M&P
written by Clement-Islam- Watch Pastor , March 09, 2012
"Based upon their scriptures."

You seem to have problem with the above phrase. I don't understand you anymore.
Are you saying that once your scriptures say something bad that should be taken as good?

Or are insinuating that once your scriptures say something it should be taken truly and not to be questioned?

Jesus denouncing religious people like you who also believe in their scriptures just like you do today but that did not stop Jesus from calling them hypocrites, blind guide who their scriptures taught them to carry out all those external rituality without inner purity? You probably wanted Jesus to say peace be upon you?

You want us to leave you to carry out your external empty rituality, of bowing, and prostrating to an idol in disobedient to God commandment, simply because your scriptures say so?

I am sorry Christians are not trained to believe anything without proofs that message is godly and is from God. We are to test every doctrine whether is from Angel Gabriel or not with what God has revealed before.

Your Quran also said you should consult Christians to know the truth but because of pride of religion you refused to consult us free of charge. We don't collect consultancy fees. Freely we receive freely we give.

Is it my fault that you remain ignorant and continue to worship idol? Tell me?
0
why it appears as if I hate Muslims
written by Clement-Islam- Watch Pastor , March 09, 2012
Some people here wonder why a pastor should hate the Quran with such a passion as I do here, especially my friends M&P and his brothers who think that I hate them. M&P thinks I am a fake pastor and a liar I do not follow the teaching of Christ.

Actullay my problem is with the Books and the bugus prophet and not with the Muslim who are victims of the great scam

Let me take time here explain to you the reasons why it appear so:

1.Normally we expect that a book of guidance or religion should make Saints out of Sinners instead the Quran breeds Sinners instead of Saints. Sin is cerebrated as righteous needs Eg. Polygamy, honor killing, assassination of religious opponent, killing of apostates.

2. The book breeds Terrorists like mosquitoes instead of Teachers of the truth.

3.More Religious people are made out of the book rather than make Righteous people with Right relationship with God.

4.Mere External Rituality is Emphasized rather than revealing the Real condition of the heart of men. External Piety instead of internal Purity.
5.The book teaches that you should hate your neighbor especially if they are “infidels”
Instead of Love your Neighbor even if they are your enemies.

6. The book create more enemies than it creates friends

7.The book makes man to nurse the idea of beating the wife, divorce or change her like a wrapper instead of love and stick to her as one never to be separated as taught by divine books.

8.The book gives special dispensation to it lone prophet as if the Prophet was God.

9.The book lack clear promise of salvation for those who believe in its teachings especially as it said everything has already been predetermined whether one is going to heaven or not, one hasn’t any say of where he or she was going to be. This makes the religion a foolish one isn’t it?

10.The book erodes the reasoning capacity of men and make them like morons as one become insane with its demonic teachings as no demon was ever cast out as a result of believing its content instead demons are said to be converts and disciples of the religion inspired by the book Q72

Can you see why I appear to hate the book and worried that a human being like me with full reasoning capacity and right to decide his destiny should choose such a book as a book of guidance?

Think about it.
0
Mr Khanxm
written by Malem , March 09, 2012
I would liek to move away from this topic of name calling, my point was to apply your censorship equally that is all, nothing more nothing less. Frankly it takes away from the discussion at hand.
Regarding your land comment, if we go back to the 630's, then we should go back to the BC era before the Israelis existed? I dont think that makes sense at all. My point was there were agreed to borders, neither side likes those borders, but it is the reference point from 1967 that we have. With some consideration to both sides they should agree on them. The apartheid or segregation that occurs in reference to your comment that Muslims would not Allow Jews to live in their areas. First when a group of settlers want Arab land it is an easy process, locate an area to settle, put up a rudimentary hut, ask the government for protection and if granted expand. Then protest the government for mor humane housing and bingo you have yourself a wonderful village on stolen land. The reverse is Never true and Palestinian cannot even go back onto land that was taken from him its not allowed. As for Arabs blocked Jews to settle for example in Gaza, I doubt there is one that would want to locate to that prison.
0
Malem
written by Clement-Islam- Watch Pastor , March 09, 2012
"My point was there were agreed to borders, neither side likes those borders, but it is the reference point from 1967 that we have. "

why do you want the Jews to relinguish the land the posssessed by milillitary power? In 1948 the Arabs on the pronouncement of the United Nation granting Israel the status of a suvereign state they mobilised themselves to kill the new state but could not the regroup in 1967 but do could not push the new state to the sea either instead Israel gain more land by power, so you want them to give up the land why?
0
Sweet Doctor diagnoses...
written by duh_swami , March 09, 2012
I would liek to move away from this topic of name calling, my point was to apply your censorship equally that is all, nothing more nothing less. Frankly it takes away from the discussion at hand.

Uh huh...Pop-Eye, talking dogs don't take away from the discussion Doctor? It woulds seem you need to remove the cinder from your own eye before removing it from others...I'm only telling you this to remind you of how sweet you really are...
0
...
written by duh_swami , March 09, 2012
My point was there were agreed to borders, neither side likes those borders, but it is the reference point from 1967 that we have.

The 1967 borders were not 'agreed' to except after the fact...They are a result of land captured in a war Israel did not start...To the victor go the spoils...Mohammad knew all about that...
0
Duh
written by Malem , March 09, 2012
I was addressing Mr khan, I find your banter to be quite immature and of no pertinent value to the discussion at hand.
0
Doctor so sweet
written by duh_swami , March 09, 2012
It does so pain me to have to tell you this sweets, but I don't care what you think. You believe in fairy tales so your opinion is squat sweet Dr Man...This is an open forum Sweetest Doctor subject to open banter...if you want private conversation, get your own web site..and don't presume you have the balls to talk down to me sweet Abu...People who believe in Islamic Fairy tales have no balls...
0
@Malem
written by Editor, M A Khan , March 09, 2012
Had the Jews lost any of the wars the Arab states waged against them, there would be no Jewish state, no Jew in that part of the world.

When you wage a war and lose it, you have to bear consequences. Had Muslim defeated Israel, the Jews would never have gotten the land they lived on over the past 3,000 years. To reciprocate in similar terms, the Jews could do the same, but they are not. Muslims should realize this simple fact, and seek a solution in that light. They must concede that fact they have occupied and desecrated the holiest place of the Jews for long enough. Now is the time to evacuate, just like no kuffar is allowed into Mecca or Medina.
0
Khan
written by Malem , March 09, 2012
Im not convinced they have desecrated it at all and I dont think kicking people out of their country will achieve anthing but worse fighting. I do think that their can be agreement to settle as they almost did with Mr clinton however it takes a strong leader on both sides and unfortunately at that time it did not occur, close but not close enough. That being said, there is an apartheid approach being taken in Israel, in my opinion.
0
To M&P
written by Yibel , March 09, 2012
"Now please confirm where your Lord and Saviour used this principle and called people names after reading their scriptures?"

You do realise that the ONLY scriptures available at the time when Yah'shua (Jesus) The Lord and Savior (Messiah) lived was the Torah/Tanakh, the Jewish scriptures? No other scriptures existed!!! Yah'shua came to fulfill those scriptures, which he did by living an exemplary life, preaching the kingdom of the true God YHVH, and dying for our sins on the cross. He gave up his life willingly, so that we might have everlasting life - despite our sins.

I will repeat what Clement-Islam- Watch Pastor wrote:
"when your scriptures describe what your prophet did and it was exactly what a thief does we call him a thief and if it was assassination we have no any other name but to call him an assassin, and when he acted like a false prophet who say do as I say but don't do as I do, we call him a false prophet and so on and so forth"

Cheers.
0
Yibel
written by Muslim and proud , March 09, 2012
"You do realise that the ONLY scriptures available at the time when Yah'shua (Jesus) The Lord and Savior (Messiah) lived was the Torah/Tanakh, the Jewish scriptures? No other scriptures existed!!! Yah'shua came to fulfill those scriptures, which he did by living an exemplary life, preaching the kingdom of the true God YHVH, and dying for our sins on the cross. He gave up his life willingly, so that we might have everlasting life - despite our sins. "

Please can you let us know how the Talmud for example, describes Jesus?

Cheers
0
Malem
written by Editor, M A Khan , March 10, 2012
Im not convinced they have desecrated it at all
If a Jew steps into Islam's holy city of Medina, which primarily belonged to the Jews before the birth of Islam, desecrates that place -- then Muslim invaders' occupation of the Jewish holy city of Jerusalem certainly desecrated the Jewish holy place much more and Muslims' continued presence there perpetuate the same. A final solution of the problem now have to be based on that realization.
0
mrkhan
written by Malem , March 10, 2012
You state "which primarily belonged" so even you have left the door open that it was not theirs exclusively from the beginning of time nor did they possess it always. As for various conquering acts that occurred throughout the milleniums, it is extremely common for holy places of worship to be converted and used by the then new society. That being said places like the Dome of the Rock were not descecrated by the philistines rather enhanced and protected and last time I checked it was not the philistines who were tunneling under it putting it in grave danger. Not really sure what all this has to do with the original topic, seems to have gone off path again.
0
@ Malem
written by Editor, M A Khan , March 10, 2012
By "primarily belonged to Jews", I wanted to state the fact that Jews were the founder of the settlement of Medina, and they were the dominant and richer community alongside the Pagans before Muhammad migrated there.

Malem, Kaba is a pagan temple barbarically occupied by Muhammad's army and made it Islam's holiest mosque. Suppose today, another more powerful religious community occupy and make it their holy place. Then Muslims became powerful again after 1000 years, won't they make every effort to reclaim holy Mecca and the Ka'ba from their latest occupiers? Of course, they will; and they will undoubtedly use the most barbaric cruelties upon the weakened occupiers. The Jewish build-up of settlements in Jerusalem is aimed at reclaiming their holy places that was occupied by Muslims in similar manner. You may call it apartheid, but Muslims would have done the same, but with much more barbarism and cruelties.

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comments.

busy
 

About the book || Reviews by: Steven Simpson | Abul Kasem | Prof Sami Alrabaa | Ibn Kammuna

islamic-jihad-cover


'Islamic Jihad' in Bangla
islamic-jihad-bangla
Aasma Riaz: "Thank you so much for your book "Islamic Jihad" and showing me the "Big Picture". For 7-8 days, I was glued to your book, absorbing so much information that I did not know existed. You have crisply covered so much in your book and quoted historical references extensively. I am just overwhelmed with different emotions after reading your book..., a priceless tome."

Editor: M A Khan | Site design: Dan Zaremba
Founded on 20 November 2005


Announcements

Sign petition:  Grant Imran Firasat Asylum in the USA

imran-firasat

Proxy Server: To view blocked websites, use this: iwebproxy

Syndication