Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

event horizon · Mar 16, 2010

Koran 9:17 - It is not for the idolaters to inhabit God's places of worship, witnessing against themselves unbelief; those -- their works have failed them, and in the Fire they shall dwell forever.

9:18 - Only he shall inhabit God's places of worship who believes in God and the Last Day, and performs the prayer, and pays the alms, and fears none but God alone; it may be that those will be among the guided.

Personally, I think Muslims are very lucky that the Israelis don't simply take over al-Aqsa mosque and convert it into a synagogue, as the Koran records the Muslims doing to Pagan Arabia's greatest house of worship.

Needless to say, I'm sure there wouldn't be any Muslims to condemn such actions of the Israelis as we have seen Muslims on this forum condone similar actions of the Muslims during Muhammad's time as described above.

Palestinians have clashed with Israeli police in two areas of occupied East Jerusalem after Palestinian groups called for a "day of rage" over the reopening of a synagogue in the Old City.

Palestinians threw stones at Israeli police who responded with stun grenades in the Shuafat and Essawiyya neighbourhoods early on Tuesday.

About 3,000 police officers had been deployed in east Jerusalem and nearby villages after Hamas called for action in response to the reopening of the Hurva synagogue.

The Hurva synagogue, considered by some people to to be one of Judaism's most sacred sites, reopened for the first time in 62 years on Monday in the Jewish quarter of Jerusalem's Old City.

The walled Old City is at the heart of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which makes the reopening of the synagogue controversial.

Moreover, al-Aqsa, Islam's third holiest site, and the Hurva are about just 700 metres apart.

Hamas warning

The previous day, Khaled Meshaal, Hamas' political chief who is exiled in Syria, strongly condemned the ceremony.

"We warn against this action by the Zionist enemy to rebuild and dedicate the Hurva synagogue. It signifies the destruction of the al-Aqsa mosque and the building of the temple," he said at a meeting of Palestinian groups' leaders in Damscus on Monday.

He urged Palestinians in Jerusalem to "take serious measures to protect al-Aqsa mosque from destruction and Judaisation".

The Hurva synagogue, first built in 1694, was destroyed in 1721 and then demolished during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.

The nearby al-Aqsa site is revered by Muslims as al-Haram al-Sharif (the Noble Sanctuary), comprising al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock. It is known to Jews as the Temple Mount.

An Israeli government decision to include two West Bank religious sites in a Jewish national heritage plan has already angered Palestinians and raised tensions in recent weeks.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middl ... 50987.html

shafique · Mar 17, 2010

Talking about not condoning actions - you remain the only person this forum (well, perhaps Chev-the-chav will come out and support your view) so far who condones the cold blooded slaughter of civilians and the enslavement of virgins - as described in the Bible. You say this is ok as long as God ordered it.

That makes you as extreme as the 'Lords Resistance Army' in Uganda - who you insist are Christian Terrorists (to the rest of us they are un-Christian nutters), and empirically more extreme than Bin Laden.

As for the provocative moves in illegally annexed East Jerusalem - I'm not surprised there are protests against the attempts to consolidate the already illegal annexation. I also note that Israel is now clamping down on unarmed protests against the apartheid wall - by declaring military zones and forbidding peaceful protestors from outside those villagers from continuing with the weekly protests.

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Mar 17, 2010

Well, it doesn't look like Hamas is very happy of the re-opening of a Synagogue:

Amid growing tensions in east Jerusalem, senior Hamas figure Mahmoud al-Zahar leveled scathing criticism, replete with anti-Semitic rhetoric, over the rededication of the Hurva Synagogue in the Old City's Jewish Quarter.

"You who are opening Hurva are heading towards ruin. Wherever you have been you've been sent to your destruction. You've killed and murdered your prophets and you have always dealt in loan-sharking and destruction," he said Monday, during a conference of Palestinian groups in Gaza.

"You're destined to be destroyed. You've made a deal with the devil and with destruction itself – just like your synagogue," al-Zahar said.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 84,00.html

The "Zionists" are into loan-sharking, who knew?

I'm not surprised there are protests against the attempts to consolidate the already illegal annexation.

The violent protests are over Israel's re-opening of a Synagogue. I thought you would be the first to cheerlead this move since you condone the actions of the early Muslims when they illegally annexed a house of worship belonging to the Pagans.

As far as I can tell, this Synagogue being re-opened was not previously used as a Mosque or other holy place. So, in my book, if you condone the actions of the early Muslims, then logically you should also condone what Israel is doing.

There's no real difference. However, I think the Pal-Arabs are lucky that Israel doesn't go as far as Allah and the early Muslims do according to the Koran. The Muslim Arabs take over the house of worship that was being used by the Pagan Arabs and convert it into a Masjid (or revert it into a Masjid according to fable found only in the Koran).

Would you condemn or condone Israel if they decided, one day, to restore the Third Temple, on which the al-Aqsa mosque complex sits atop, by taking over the mosque complex and converting the buildings there back into the Temple?

I hope you wouldn't have any problem with that. Cuz, you know, that would make you sound hypocritical.

shafique · Mar 17, 2010

Hey, the Palestinians have said they won't discriminate against any citizens of Palestine, regardless of religion.

The protests are understandable in light of the fact the sites are in illegally annexed territory.

I understand your MO is to avoid questions and post long obfuscating cuts and pastes when it is pointed out that your extremist religious views are more extreme than Al Qaeda.

I'm so glad that you agree that I don't share your views!

Cheers,
Shafique

Flying Dutchman · Mar 17, 2010

It is very Muslim to try to erase every possible bit of Jewish history. For long periods of time there was/is a Jewish majority is Jerusalem. Lets not forget that in 1948/1948 Jews were erased from East-Jeruslam, including everything that reminded of them. Now, they rebuild a synagogue. Freedom of religion is obviously unknown in most of the Arab world.

Shafique also seems to forget that selling land to Jews equals the death penalty in the areas controlled by the PA. Which is according to him no discrimination. :roll:

shafique · Mar 17, 2010

Yeah, yeah - blame the victims - as usual.

It's not the Palestinians that are breaking international law by annexing East Jerusalem, is it?

As for the death penalty for acts of treason - that's in many country's statute books to this day, and the death penalty is given if the act of selling land is defined as treasonable (and given the PA does define it this way, there's a strong incentive not to break this particular law). I didn't say I agreed with the law - but I can't see how that is relevant to Israel's illegal actions in East Jerusalem.

When the US has to come out and apologise for appearing to be critical towards Israel for its crimes, you know the lobby has been working over-time!

Cheers,
Shafique

Flying Dutchman · Mar 17, 2010

shafique wrote:Yeah, yeah - blame the victims - as usual.

Rioting against the opening of a synagogue makes the Arabs victims? :roll:

shafique wrote:It's not the Palestinians that are breaking international law by annexing East Jerusalem, is it?

Yes, I realize you want to obscure the fact that the riots broke because of a synagogue.

shafique wrote:As for the death penalty for acts of treason

So, you agree selling land to Jews is treason? Most Arabs will agree with you. :roll:

shafique wrote: but I can't see how that is relevant to Israel's illegal actions in East Jerusalem.

It was you who brought it up. :roll:

event horizon · Mar 17, 2010

The protests are understandable in light of the fact the sites are in illegally annexed territory.

Land that was gained after the Arabs lost a war. I don't see any Muslims willing to share Mecca (land that was forcefully annexed) with any Pagans or perhaps even Christians. Funny how certain 'power-words' are used to spin our understanding of an event.

Or did I miss something? Perhaps in your world the conquest of Mecca and forceful take-over of a house of worship used by people of another religion is somehow different to what the Israelis are doing (I mean, obviously the Israelis aren't taking over any mosques and converting them to synagogues)?

So, would you condemn or condone the Israelis if they took over the al-Aqsa masjid (territory acquired after winning a war) and converted the compound into the third temple - prohibiting Muslims from either visiting or worshiping there and only allowing Jews?

shafique · Mar 17, 2010

Yes, Israeli actions in illegally annexed Jerusalem were provocative and did lead to riots.

Christian and Muslim Palestinians object to the Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem (not least because it is illegal) - and both denounce the attempts to consolidate the illegal annexation.

Of course, it is very convenient to try and paint this as an anti-Semitic event rather than a protest against colonialisation. But hey, why change a tactic that seemed to work in the past?

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Mar 17, 2010

I'm sure Pagans also objected to the illegal annexation of their place of worship by the Muslims, as ordered by Allah in the Koran.

Do you condemn or condone the illegal annexation of land (a place of worship!) by the Muslims?

Yes, you condemn the illegal theft of holy land by the Arab Muslims or...

...no, you are a hypocrite and defend Muslim theft of land because Allah commands it in the Koran?

shafique · Mar 18, 2010

You really like living in the orientalist past don't you eh?

In the 20th and 21st century you will find that it is a colonial Israel that is being opposed by Christian and Muslim Palestinians - as well as well-meaning Israelis who are also against oppression.

Your fantasy world of Muslim fanatics (who are less religiously extreme than you, btw - as they don't condone the war crimes you condone) just exists in your head.

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Mar 18, 2010

event horizon wrote:I'm sure Pagans also objected to the illegal annexation of their place of worship by the Muslims, as ordered by Allah in the Koran.

Do you condemn or condone the illegal annexation of land (a place of worship!) by the Muslims?

Yes, you condemn the illegal theft of holy land by the Arab Muslims or...

...no, you are a hypocrite and defend Muslim theft of land because Allah commands it in the Koran?

shafique · Mar 18, 2010

So, I hope you're not arguing that the Christian Palestinians and Israeli and foreign peace activists are now all following the Quran now are they! (Well, in a way they are - for God instructs all people to protest against injustice - but I'm not sure the Christians etc are doing it because of the Quran)

When you take your head out of the bucket of sand labelled 'orientalist, Islamophobic quaint views' perhaps you'll realise how funny that views would be! :drunken:

event horizon · Mar 18, 2010

Thank you for acknowledging that you're 'ok' with Muslims stealing land.

I guess I was correct in assuming your support for Islamic supremacy - no shocker there.

I think it's fair to say that you only condemn an 'injustice' if Muslims are the recipients - and maybe you'll condemn an injustice carried out by Muslims for good pr points for the Westerners in your midst, at least once in a blue moon (as long as it does not criticize the proph or the Koran).

shafique · Mar 19, 2010

You and your fantasies again. :roll:

So, Israel breaks international law in East Jerusalem and blames the victims. The fanbois blame the Muslims - and ignore the fact that Christian and Muslim Palestinians are protesting against Israel's illegal annexation.

And the retort... 'you are ok with Muslim conquests'! (Duh!)

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Mar 19, 2010

Thank you for admitting that you support the illegal annexation of land (a holy place, no less) when the perps behind this illegal action are Muhammad and his followers and the instruction is given by Allah.

Do you sleep well at night knowing that you're just as fanatical as al-Qaeda - you support illegal annexation of land, do not believe in evolution and believe the sun orbits the earth ??

shafique · Mar 19, 2010

shafique wrote:You and your fantasies again.

So, Israel breaks international law in East Jerusalem and blames the victims. The fanbois blame the Muslims - and ignore the fact that Christian and Muslim Palestinians are protesting against Israel's illegal annexation.

And the retort... 'you are ok with Muslim conquests'! (Duh!)

And just because you are demonstrably more fanatic than Al Qaeda by condoning enslavement and rape of virgins by Israelites (because God told them to do it), or you believe the Quran says the sun orbits the earth, doesn't mean I share your views. (I don't)

But hey, as I said - your fantasies are your fantasies!

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Mar 20, 2010

The Koran says the Sun, like the moon, has courses. You say potato....

Anyways, I thank you for admitting that you condone the illegal theft of land (a holy place!) because Allah says so. Though, it speaks volumes that you do not see your own hypocrisy....

Obviously, that is not as extreme as murdering your own son because a voice in your head told you to do so, but you've already admitted that you don't see that as a form of extremism.

Sauce for the goose, indeed!

shafique · Mar 20, 2010

1. Your weird interpretations are what I'm terming 'fantasies'
2. Israel is breaking international law in East Jerusalem - that is what is making the actions illegal. Conquests carried out before these laws were enacted (eg America, Australia, South Africa, South America, England etc etc - all carried out after the Muslim conquests) weren't illegal - just conquests. The earlier Muslim conquests are benign compared to the genocide committed in the USA etc.

What is fascinating is that you don't dispute that you're a more extreme religious fanatic than Al Qaeda as you condone enslavement and rape of virgins by Israelites. You just want to make out that we're as religiously fanatic as you are - but unfortunately for you we're not.

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Mar 20, 2010

1) The Koran says the sun courses [around] the earth. In other words, the earth is stationary and it is the sun that moves.

2) I'm not aware of any genocide carried out in the 'USA', but I'm happy to compare the number of natives who were killed by settlers, militias and US government to disbelievers slain during the early Muslim conquests. Last I remembered, you had not taken me up on my offer to compare the number of disbelievers murdered by Muslim war criminals to the number of civilians killed in the first crusade.

We can also look at the facts and determine if any genocide was actually carried out in the 'USA' - or if this is more revisionist belief.

3) I do not condone the theft of a holy place that was actually used by people of another religion and the conversion of that holy place into a mosque where only Muslims could now enter. You are definitely more extreme than Israel, which has not only not taken over the al-Aqsa masjid compound but given control of the site to Muslims. They also share their holy sites with Muslims and Christians - something that the Koran prohibits (as well as recording the theft of the pagan holy place of worship).

shafique · Mar 20, 2010

So you're not aware of any genocides in what is now USA? Hmm - sounds like a new thread to me.

But I'm still fascinated that you're not denying your a bigger religious fanatic than Al Qaeda and not denying the fact Israel is breaking the law in East Jerusalem - but seem to be wanting to live in the past to justify your views that the Israelites did no wrong when they enslaved and raped 32,000 virgins as 'God told them to do it'.

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Mar 20, 2010

So now the story changes.

You originally said genocide committed in the USA. Now that you were cornered on this wild claim, you change your tune and say genocide committed in what is now the USA.

Please don't shift the goal posts.

And, as I said, I'm happy to compare the number of native americans who were killed by (american) settlers, militias and the US army to the number of disblievers killed during the conquests of the 'rightly' guided caliphs.

shafique · Mar 20, 2010

So, there were no genocides after the settlers declared independence? Hmmm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_ ... of_America

Still a fascinating view of history and one I'll be happy to see you prove. (As well as your desire to compare numbers - perhaps this time you'll get to prove your point). But that's for another thread.

Any genocides before independence by Europeans, still make my point - Israel's breaking of international law in East Jerusalem is not comparable, because the law did not exist when the American Natives were being slaughtered. (Of course, genocide by the Europeans was worse than the injustices in East Jerusalem - but I'm just pointing out how funny it is you're seeking to excuse Israel's crimes by going back over a 1000 years and skipping over genocides carried out by Europeans).

shafique wrote:But I'm still fascinated that you're not denying your a bigger religious fanatic than Al Qaeda and not denying the fact Israel is breaking the law in East Jerusalem - but seem to be wanting to live in the past to justify your views that the Israelites did no wrong when they enslaved and raped 32,000 virgins as 'God told them to do it'.

shafique · Mar 20, 2010

Interestingly, the link I gave above also has this quote :

The Old Testament describes the genocides of Amalekites and Midianites.[8] Jones quotes Jerusalem-based Holocaust Studies Professor Yehuda Bauer: "As a Jew, I must live with the fact that the civilization I inherited ... encompasses the call for genocide in its canon."

And eh - you need to get editing, the page does not list any of the genocides you imagined took place by the early Muslims!
:shock:

event horizon · Mar 20, 2010

I guess you're not familiar with the term genocide - and the authors seem to distort its meaning as well. Andrew Jackson had not intention of wiping out native tribes (he had an adopted native son) - which is what a genocide is, the complete eradication of a group of people.

In the actual incidents described, a few thousand natives died after they were forcefully relocated. That was a brutal episode, but it wasn't a genocide. There was no attempt to wipe the natives out. There were also a few bloody battles, but the combined casualties during the indian wars add up to no more than ten thousand or so - over several decades of fighting. Ethnic cleansing, in regards to forced relocation ? Sure. Genocide? Hardly.

By contrast, the number of Jews living in Medina was probably no more than a few thousand, but as many as ninety percent were forcefully evicted, executed or enslaved and sold for weapons. In fact, perhaps twenty percent of Medina's Jewish population were beheaded on one grizzly afternoon. If what happened to the natives was ethnic cleansing, then this was genocide.

And I won't even mention the genocide/brutal massacres the Muslims inflicted on the poor inhabitants of certain cities and towns that did not peacefully surrender....that would just be unfair for you.

shafique · Mar 20, 2010

Well, back to the subject of East Jerusalem protests.

The Israeli regime has been caught out in a lie:
http://coteret.com/2010/03/15/yediot-ex ... -protests/

Flying Dutchman · Mar 20, 2010

shafique wrote:1. Your weird interpretations are what I'm terming 'fantasies'
2. Israel is breaking international law in East Jerusalem - that is what is making the actions illegal. Conquests carried out before these laws were enacted (eg America, Australia, South Africa, South America, England etc etc - all carried out after the Muslim conquests) weren't illegal - just conquests. The earlier Muslim conquests are benign compared to the genocide committed in the USA etc.

I dont believe international law is the ultimate test of morality. First thing you learn in law school is that law and justice are two different things. And I fully agree.

Simple question: Does international law supersede sharia law?

shafique · Mar 20, 2010

Morality is indeed subjective. I mean, I personally think that it is horrendous today to condone the enslavement and rape of virgins, whether it is in Uganda by the Christian terrorist group LRA or when condoning the actions of Israelites described in the Bible. The fact that some people condone these acts is for their conscience.

On the illegality of Israel's actions in East Jerusalem - the law is unequivocal. Annexation of the territory is illegal - and even the USA historically clearly stated this fact.

I personally think that the clearing of the Maghreb quarter in 1967 and the bulldozing of homes was immoral, but others may think otherwise. What is beyond dispute is that it violated the Geneva conventions on how occupied peoples' lands may be administered.

You may disagree with me that Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem is immoral, but you've never challenged the fact that it is illegal. In fact you haven't supported the annexation at all, have you FD.

Edit- and yes, International law supersedes Shariah law - especially when it comes to some of the medieval implementations of it by some mullahs.

Al Qaeda don't go as far as 'eh' in their religious fanaticism, for example, and where they break international law they are roundly condemned by the majority of Muslims, not just me.

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Mar 20, 2010

and where they break international law they are roundly condemned by the majority of Muslims, not just me.

Sure. Just not the majority or large minority of Muslims who fully support al-Qaeda. Let alone the ones on the sidelines who sympathize with their actions/world views.

shafique · Mar 21, 2010

The point in this thread is that Israel is actually breaking international law in East Jerusalem in seeking to consolidate the illegal annexation.

Two wrongs don't make a right - and here the ones in the wrong are clearly those who are breaking international law.

As for the survey above, again you give it without any references (when will you learn???). It would be interesting to see what the results are for Israel - what was the approval rating of the Operation Cast Lead which killed many, many children? (And in any case it doesn't address the statement I made in regards to international law - at all.)

Your views about violence against civilians is actually more extreme than Al Qaeda and their supporters - just see the thread 'Biblical War Crimes':

I understand you have a logic to equate the enslavement of virgins and their rape with natural disasters. I just happen to not share this view - and think it rather perverse a way to justify murder and rape by Israelites.

The question though was whether you acknowledge you are more extreme than Al Qaeda and are proud of this fact.

It's a fact you haven't challenged yet.

Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

Clashes Break Out Over Re-opening Of Synagogue

Go To

Dubai Discussions

Dubai Expat Forums

Dubai Business

Dubai Tech Discussions

Dubai Classifieds