M
Montalban
Guest
It’s madness to do so to someone who’s going to cut it off
- Status
M
Montalban
Guest
Not many people would have picked-up on the punch-line to that very sexist/offensive joke.
I have.
P
pro_universal
Guest
chosen people,
You didn’t directly answer the questions, which to me implies that you either aren’t comfortable with the answers or that you are more interested in accusing me of being a conspiracy theorist or anti-semite than in discussing. If that’s the case, there’s no point in continuing, but I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.
This thread needs some facts, so here are some links I think we can all agree are reliable to make some of the points here, and I’ll quote chosen people for each issue:
Reasons for fighting:
Here’s the PLO covenant:mideastweb.org/plocha.htm
[
That doesn’t look like “No Israeli action in Gaza” to me.
You didn’t directly answer the questions, which to me implies that you either aren’t comfortable with the answers or that you are more interested in accusing me of being a conspiracy theorist or anti-semite than in discussing. If that’s the case, there’s no point in continuing, but I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.
This thread needs some facts, so here are some links I think we can all agree are reliable to make some of the points here, and I’ll quote chosen people for each issue:
Hamas Charter:yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/hamas.htm
Reasons for fighting:
Views on Religion:
There is no “destroy all Jews” call in this charter. None whatsoever, as radical as it is.
Here’s the PLO covenant:mideastweb.org/plocha.htm
Your next issue is land. You say:
Here’s the reality of this claim:
[
](BBC NEWS | Middle East | Palestinians killed on Gaza beach)
That doesn’t look like “No Israeli action in Gaza” to me.
M
Montalban
Guest
And so you continue to justify it
P
pro_universal
Guest
continued…
Chosen people, you say:
Why the double standard? Here’s what the Likud party (from which Sharon came) says about it:knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm
capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2135
The extent of the fraud and misuse of sources in the book is detailed there. In Academic circles, this is old news…there is no one in the field of history who continues to claim that Joan Peters’ book was accurate.
You next turned to the war in 1948:
I refer you again to the committee report of 1946:
yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/anglo/angch06.htm
Chosen people, you say:
And go to any Zionist site and look at a map. Do you see a Palestine? Or is it okay for Israelis to deny that Palestinians have any right of self-determination or any claim to the land, but totally outrageous for Palestinians to say the same about Israelis?
Why the double standard? Here’s what the Likud party (from which Sharon came) says about it:knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm
Your claim that Israel is willing to let the Palestinians be (or that it ever was) is simply false. Your country consistently elects parties that deny the right of Palestinians to a state. Israel is not now and never has been under a government that accepts the two state solution.
Joan Peters’ work is a hoax. It has been exposed as such by every single party who has ever checked the footnotes (which you can do for yourself.) Here’s a short article on it:
capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2135
The extent of the fraud and misuse of sources in the book is detailed there. In Academic circles, this is old news…there is no one in the field of history who continues to claim that Joan Peters’ book was accurate.
Please provide a source for the census. I’ve never seen anything that says Jews were a majority in Jerusalem before the Zionist immigration movements.
You next turned to the war in 1948:
This is patently false. The Palmach was far better armed than the opposition, and Jewish groups before the establishment of the state opposed a cease fire in UN security council debates (that was in 1946–precise citation to the UN records coming.) The anglo american committee of inquiry report here:yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/anglo/angch09.htm lists the strengths of the various illegal Jewish militias at the time. They had been procuring arms and engaging in terrorist activity for years prior to the war, and were better armed and trained than any of the Arab armies they faced.
Ah yes, now the Palestinians don’t exist?
I refer you again to the committee report of 1946:
yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/anglo/angch06.htm
There you have a recorded demand for Palestinian Arab independence…in 1946. Your claim that there are no Palestinians, or that they never cared about the land, is blatantly false.
M
Montalban
Guest
So you want to talk about terror in general? Why do Moslems participate in acts of terror? It’s in the Koran.
The Banishment
[59.2] He it is Who caused those who disbelieved of the followers of the Book to go forth from their homes at the first banishment you did not think that they would go forth, while they were certain that their fortresses would defend them against Allah; but Allah came to them whence they did not expect, and cast terror into their hearts; they demolished their houses with their own hands and the hands of the believers; therefore take a lesson, O you who have eyes!
P
pro_universal
Guest
Just one question: What in the piece of my post even remotely implies that it’s talking about “terrorism in general”, and not Palestinian demands for self-government?
You cited a verse that explains a war between Muslim armies and the Banu Nadhir. This was a war between two tribes, and the result of the war was that the Banu Nadhir were not killed, but by the terms of settlement left their homes.
How exactly does that “support terrorism”??? Go to war with another people who attacked you, and then instead of killing them, allow them to leave their strategic positions and go elsewhere?
I’m starting to wonder if you’re actually reading the book to come up with this or if you’re just taking a quote here and there from anti-islamic websites that don’t provide any context or understanding of the text.
M
Montalban
Guest
Nothing does. Your posts are off topic. The topic has nothing to do with Palestine self-government. I had noted for some time that you are seeking to deflect the topic. I invite you to at least talk about terrorism in general. I’d tried to get you to talk about suicide bombers. Now I want to talk to you about terrorism, in a more general sense, with regards Islam’s support for it.
And Moslems got their property
Book 019, Number 4347:
It has been narrated on the authority of Umar, who said: The properties abandoned by Banu Nadir were the ones which Allah bestowed upon His Apostle for which no expedition was undertaken either with cavalry or camelry. These properties were particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him). He would meet the annual expenditure of his family from the income thereof, and would spend what remained for purchasing horses and weapons as preparation for Jihad.
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4347
and then argued over it see
Book 019, Number 4349:
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4349
And it seems that it was in order to humilate them
Book 043, Number 7185:
Sa’id b. Jubair reported: I said to Ibn 'Abbas about Sura Tauba, whereupon he said: As for Sura Tauba, it is meant to humiliate (the non-believers and the hypocrites). There is constantly revealed in it (the pronoun) minhum (of them) and minhom (of them, i. e. such is the condition of some of them) till they (the Muslims) thought that none would be left unmentioned out of them who would not be blamed (for one fault or the other). I again said: What about Sura Anfal? He said: It pertains to the Battle of Badr. I again asked him about Sura al-Hashr. He said: It was revealed in connection with (the tribe) of Banu Nadir.
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/043.smt.html#043.7185
But leaving that aside, we’ll move on…
Like any other time you suddenly decide to discuss something with me, its only when you think you’ve scored a point. And this is one of them. You start indignantly that I’ve interrupted your red-herring. We now move onto you attempting to white-wash Islamic terror.
The passage of the Koran I cited is but the first stage of engaging you in discussion. The passage is ‘in general’ about terrorism in the Koran as urged by your god. Their homes were destroyed. Terror was cast into their hearts…
[59.2] He it is Who caused those who disbelieved of the followers of the Book to go forth from their homes at the first banishment you did not think that they would go forth, while they were certain that their fortresses would defend them against Allah; but Allah came to them whence they did not expect, and cast terror into their hearts; they demolished their houses with their own hands and the hands of the believers; therefore take a lesson, O you who have eyes!
If they came to a ‘settlement’ following this act of terror, perhaps you think it’s well justified then? Perhaps if they weren’t killed, then the ‘terror’ inspired is okay? I understood that terrorism was about inspiring terror. Evidently you don’t.
[8.12] When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them
Terror seems a much used weapon.
M
Montalban
Guest
However now that you raise the issue of the Banu Nadhir I shall like to mention the fact that Muhammed permitted that their leader be killed through trechery. Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf was a noted poet.
Volume 5, Book 59, Number 369:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:
Allah’s Apostle said, “Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?” Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, “O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?” The Prophet said, “Yes,” Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). "The Prophet said, “You may say it.” Then Muhammad bin Maslama went to Kab and said, “That man (i.e. Muhammad demands Sadaqa (i.e. Zakat) from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you.” On that, Kab said, “By Allah, you will get tired of him!” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Now as we have followed him, we do not want to leave him unless and until we see how his end is going to be. Now we want you to lend us a camel load or two of food.” (Some difference between narrators about a camel load or two.) Kab said, “Yes, (I will lend you), but you should mortgage something to me.” Muhammad bin Mas-lama and his companion said, “What do you want?” Ka’b replied, “Mortgage your women to me.” They said, “How can we mortgage our women to you and you are the most handsome of the 'Arabs?” Ka’b said, “Then mortgage your sons to me.” They said, “How can we mortgage our sons to you? Later they would be abused by the people’s saying that so-and-so has been mortgaged for a camel load of food. That would cause us great disgrace, but we will mortgage our arms to you.” Muhammad bin Maslama and his companion promised Kab that Muhammad would return to him. He came to Kab at night along with Kab’s foster brother, Abu Na’ila. Kab invited them to come into his fort, and then he went down to them. His wife asked him, “Where are you going at this time?” Kab replied, “None but Muhammad bin Maslama and my (foster) brother Abu Na’ila have come.” His wife said, “I hear a voice as if dropping blood is from him, Ka’b said. “They are none but my brother Muhammad bin Maslama and my foster brother Abu Naila. A generous man should respond to a call at night even if invited to be killed.” Muhammad bin Maslama went with two men. (Some narrators mention the men as 'Abu bin Jabr. Al Harith bin Aus and Abbad bin Bishr). So Muhammad bin Maslama went in together with two men, and sail to them, “When Ka’b comes, I will touch his hair and smell it, and when you see that I have got hold of his head, strip him. I will let you smell his head.” Kab bin Al-Ashraf came down to them wrapped in his clothes, and diffusing perfume. Muhammad bin Maslama said. " have never smelt a better scent than this. Ka’b replied. “I have got the best 'Arab women who know how to use the high class of perfume.” Muhammad bin Maslama requested Ka’b “Will you allow me to smell your head?” Ka’b said, “Yes.” Muhammad smelt it and made his companions smell it as well. Then he requested Ka’b again, “Will you let me (smell your head)?” Ka’b said, “Yes.” When Muhammad got a strong hold of him, he said (to his companions), “Get at him!” So they killed him and went to the Prophet and informed him. (Abu Rafi) was killed after Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf.”
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/059.sbt.html#005.059.369
Muhammad called upon his followers to kill Ka’b. Muhammad ibn Maslama offered his services, collecting four others. By pretending to have turned against Muhammad (the prophet), Muhammad ibn Maslama and the others enticed Ka’b out of his fortress on a moonlit night,[10] and killed him in spite of his vigorous resistance.[13] Some attribute this action to norms of the Arab society of that period that demanded retaliation for a slight to a group’s honor.[14] The Jews were terrified at his assassination, and as a Muslim biographer of Muhammad put it “…there was not a Jew who did not fear for his life”.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Nadhir
That is, terror was allowed and used as a weapon
Volume 5, Book 59, Number 369:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:
Allah’s Apostle said, “Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?” Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, “O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?” The Prophet said, “Yes,” Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). "The Prophet said, “You may say it.” Then Muhammad bin Maslama went to Kab and said, “That man (i.e. Muhammad demands Sadaqa (i.e. Zakat) from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you.” On that, Kab said, “By Allah, you will get tired of him!” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Now as we have followed him, we do not want to leave him unless and until we see how his end is going to be. Now we want you to lend us a camel load or two of food.” (Some difference between narrators about a camel load or two.) Kab said, “Yes, (I will lend you), but you should mortgage something to me.” Muhammad bin Mas-lama and his companion said, “What do you want?” Ka’b replied, “Mortgage your women to me.” They said, “How can we mortgage our women to you and you are the most handsome of the 'Arabs?” Ka’b said, “Then mortgage your sons to me.” They said, “How can we mortgage our sons to you? Later they would be abused by the people’s saying that so-and-so has been mortgaged for a camel load of food. That would cause us great disgrace, but we will mortgage our arms to you.” Muhammad bin Maslama and his companion promised Kab that Muhammad would return to him. He came to Kab at night along with Kab’s foster brother, Abu Na’ila. Kab invited them to come into his fort, and then he went down to them. His wife asked him, “Where are you going at this time?” Kab replied, “None but Muhammad bin Maslama and my (foster) brother Abu Na’ila have come.” His wife said, “I hear a voice as if dropping blood is from him, Ka’b said. “They are none but my brother Muhammad bin Maslama and my foster brother Abu Naila. A generous man should respond to a call at night even if invited to be killed.” Muhammad bin Maslama went with two men. (Some narrators mention the men as 'Abu bin Jabr. Al Harith bin Aus and Abbad bin Bishr). So Muhammad bin Maslama went in together with two men, and sail to them, “When Ka’b comes, I will touch his hair and smell it, and when you see that I have got hold of his head, strip him. I will let you smell his head.” Kab bin Al-Ashraf came down to them wrapped in his clothes, and diffusing perfume. Muhammad bin Maslama said. " have never smelt a better scent than this. Ka’b replied. “I have got the best 'Arab women who know how to use the high class of perfume.” Muhammad bin Maslama requested Ka’b “Will you allow me to smell your head?” Ka’b said, “Yes.” Muhammad smelt it and made his companions smell it as well. Then he requested Ka’b again, “Will you let me (smell your head)?” Ka’b said, “Yes.” When Muhammad got a strong hold of him, he said (to his companions), “Get at him!” So they killed him and went to the Prophet and informed him. (Abu Rafi) was killed after Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf.”
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/059.sbt.html#005.059.369
Muhammad called upon his followers to kill Ka’b. Muhammad ibn Maslama offered his services, collecting four others. By pretending to have turned against Muhammad (the prophet), Muhammad ibn Maslama and the others enticed Ka’b out of his fortress on a moonlit night,[10] and killed him in spite of his vigorous resistance.[13] Some attribute this action to norms of the Arab society of that period that demanded retaliation for a slight to a group’s honor.[14] The Jews were terrified at his assassination, and as a Muslim biographer of Muhammad put it “…there was not a Jew who did not fear for his life”.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Nadhir
That is, terror was allowed and used as a weapon
M
Montalban
Guest
And as an end-note I suppose they did get off better than their co-religionists the Banu Quraizi
Book 019, Number 4364:
It has been narrated on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Jews of Banu Nadir and Banu Quraizi fought against the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) who expelled Banu Nadir, and allowed Quraiza to stay on, and granted favour to them until they too fought against him Then he killed their men, and distributed their women, children and properties among the Muslims, except that some of them had joined the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) who granted them security. They embraced Islam. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) turned out all the Jews of Medlina. Banu Qainuqa’ (the tribe of 'Abdullah b. Salim) and the Jews of Banu Haritha and every other Jew who was in Medina.
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4364
Oh, and there’s lots of bickering over their date-palms!
There’s much ado about their date-palms!
Book 019, Number 4324:
It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ordered the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be burnt and cut. These palms were at Buwaira. Qutaibah and Ibn Rumh in their versions of the tradition have added: So Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, revealed the verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks, it was with the permission of Allah so that He may disgrace the evil-doers" (lix. 5).
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4324
Book 019, Number 4325:
It is narrated on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) caused the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be cut down and burnt. It is in this connection that Hassan (the poet) said:
It was easy for the nobles of Quraish to barn Buwaira whose sparks were flying in all directions.
in the same connection was revealed the Qur’anic verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks."
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4325
Book 019, Number 4326:
'Abdullah b. Umar reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) burnt the date-palms of Banu Nadir.
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4326
Book 019, Number 4376:
It has been narrated by Anas that (after his migration to Medina) a person placed at the Prophet’s (may peace be upon him) disposal some date-palms growing on his land until the lands of Quraiza and Nadir were conquered. Then he began to return to him whatever he had received. (In this connection) my people told me to approach the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and ask from him what his people had given him or a portion thereof, but the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had bestowed those trees upon Umm Aiman. So I came to the Prophet (may peace be upon him) and he gave hem (back) to me. Umm Aiman (also) came (at this time). She put the cloth round my neck and said: No, by Allah, we will not give to, you what he has granted to me. The Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: Umm Aiman, let him have them and for you are such and such trees instead. But she said: By Allah, there is no god besides Him. No, never! The Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) continued saying: (You will get) such and such. until he had granted her ten times or nearly ten times more (than the original gift).
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4376
Book 019, Number 4364:
It has been narrated on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Jews of Banu Nadir and Banu Quraizi fought against the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) who expelled Banu Nadir, and allowed Quraiza to stay on, and granted favour to them until they too fought against him Then he killed their men, and distributed their women, children and properties among the Muslims, except that some of them had joined the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) who granted them security. They embraced Islam. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) turned out all the Jews of Medlina. Banu Qainuqa’ (the tribe of 'Abdullah b. Salim) and the Jews of Banu Haritha and every other Jew who was in Medina.
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4364
Oh, and there’s lots of bickering over their date-palms!
There’s much ado about their date-palms!
Book 019, Number 4324:
It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ordered the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be burnt and cut. These palms were at Buwaira. Qutaibah and Ibn Rumh in their versions of the tradition have added: So Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, revealed the verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks, it was with the permission of Allah so that He may disgrace the evil-doers" (lix. 5).
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4324
Book 019, Number 4325:
It is narrated on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) caused the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be cut down and burnt. It is in this connection that Hassan (the poet) said:
It was easy for the nobles of Quraish to barn Buwaira whose sparks were flying in all directions.
in the same connection was revealed the Qur’anic verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks."
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4325
Book 019, Number 4326:
'Abdullah b. Umar reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) burnt the date-palms of Banu Nadir.
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4326
Book 019, Number 4376:
It has been narrated by Anas that (after his migration to Medina) a person placed at the Prophet’s (may peace be upon him) disposal some date-palms growing on his land until the lands of Quraiza and Nadir were conquered. Then he began to return to him whatever he had received. (In this connection) my people told me to approach the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and ask from him what his people had given him or a portion thereof, but the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had bestowed those trees upon Umm Aiman. So I came to the Prophet (may peace be upon him) and he gave hem (back) to me. Umm Aiman (also) came (at this time). She put the cloth round my neck and said: No, by Allah, we will not give to, you what he has granted to me. The Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: Umm Aiman, let him have them and for you are such and such trees instead. But she said: By Allah, there is no god besides Him. No, never! The Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) continued saying: (You will get) such and such. until he had granted her ten times or nearly ten times more (than the original gift).
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4376
P
pro_universal
Guest
The situation surrounding terrorist groups and terrorist acts has everything to do with understanding terrorism. Your theory of “hey, let’s ignore what’s happening today in Israel/Palestine and read from Montalban’s googled hadiths about property disposition in a war” is senseless and has precisely zero to do with suicide bombing or this thread.
I can’t stop you from posting away and making the actual discussion of the causes of suicide terrorism hard to see, but it’s a very simple matter to unclutter the thread by ignoring your posts. Please do not expect further response.
M
Montalban
Guest
None of this deals with he fact that terrorism is a weapon that’s approved of in Islam. The current situation has nothing to do with terrorism being employed by Islam BEFORE Israel came into being. Even before the rise of western imperialism. Even before places such as England even existed as a unified nation (because Islam came about in the 600s - England arguably in the 900s*).
As noted in the Hadith (and note I don’t use GOOGLE but that site I cited - which has its own hadith searches), Moslems used terror to spread Islam. You not dealing with this is true to form.
As noted true to form you only post when you think you can score points.
You won’t deal with the topic at hand but instead seek to blur the issue with red-herrings.
You went off-topic to discuss Israel. It’s such a stock-standard ploy.
You make a general dismissal of the evidence I present - note that you don’t address its veracity at all. It wouldn’t matter even if I had got it from google. The fact is that Moslems used terror to fight tribes of Jews. Whether those tribes came to some kind of agreement or not is also irrelevant. The fact that they act under duress does not negate the terror used to bring them to the negotiating table.
True to form! And you believe that me, dealing with Islamic terror is ‘clutter’, and you dealing with the state of Israel is not! ROFL!
*I mention this because Israel came about from the mandated territory of Britain. Thus Islamic terror predates Israel. It predates the British Empire. It even predates England. And yet you want to posit this as a cause of terrorism; justifying Isalmic ‘reaction’.
C
chosen_people
Guest
T**THANK YOU FOR YOUR REPLY AND THANK YOU FOR GIVING THE INTERNET LINK TO THE HAMAS CHARTER IN ENGLISH
I BEG EVERY GOOD PEACE LOVING PERSON ON THIS EARTH- REGARDLESS OF RELIGION NATIONALITY OR CREED- TO TAKE JUST 5 MINUTES OF THEIR TIME AND READ THE ENTIRE HAMAS CHARTER
YOU MAY BE FRIGHTENED AFTERWARDS-YOU MAY HAVE TROUBLE GOING TO SLEEP TONIGHT -BUT YOU WILL BE WISER AS TO THE DANGERS FACING ALL OF US
IF I OR ANYONE OF YOU HAD EVEN HINTED AT THE THINGS WRITTEN THERE WE WOULD HAVE BEEN ACCUSED OF HATE, RACISM OR WARMONGERING. **
THE DOCUMENT IS NOT FAKE. IT IS REAL. THERE IS A HAMAS AND THERE ARE MANY RADICAL ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALIST GROUPS AND EVEN RADICAL ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALIST COUNTRIES LIKE IRAN. YOU OWE THOSE FIVE MINUTES TO YOURSELVES AND YOUR CHILDREN.
M
Montalban
Guest
The Hamas Charter has such rich irony.
I like the bit where they talk about Palestine being the target of invasion, and without thinking don’t even note that they (the Moslems) took control of it themselves by invasion.
S
Sixtus
Guest
I am not saying you are wrong but I have never seen it in the Quran.
If you are going to pick on my Moslem sisters and brothers, lets talk about Christian terrorism, or is that too close to home?
C
Charlie_Zeaiter
Guest
Hi Sixtus,… If you are going to pick on my Moslem sisters and brothers, lets talk about Christian terrorism, or is that too close to home?
It’s not that it’s too close too home, but rather, it is off topic; The thread is about “How a suicide bomber thinks”. Talking about Christian terrorism is about as off topic in this thread as talking about terorism by Jews, and Moslems, and the Mafia, and Pagans, and Athiests, and Devil worshippers etc…
We didn’t mean to pick on Moslems. But somehow, somebody noticed that suicide bombers are invariably Moslems. Hence, the following quotes…
“In short; suicide-bombers think that by killing people they’ll get heavenly rewards” (see Post # 82)
“… terrorism is a weapon that’s approved of in Islam” (see Post # 109)
But there is an obvious attempt to divert the connection between suicide bombers and Moslems, almost to the point of justifying terrrorism to raise awareness of Palestinian refugees.
M
mary_bobo
Guest
With regard to the OP, there was an interesting documentary on last night which will be repeated at 4:00 this afternoon on Fox News Network. The title is “Radical Islam, in its own words”. Perhaps some of you would find this of interest.
P
pro_universal
Guest
You need to review the thread. One suicide bomber has been discussed in detail here, the grandma who blew herself up near some IDF troops…what did she cite as her reason?
The fact that an Israeli bomb killed her grandchildren. No one in the article talks about the Quran or Islam, they talk about her dead grandchildren. And the existence of Christian suicide bombers in Lebanon and Christian PLO members in Israel testifies to that fact…it’s not about the religion, it’s about the violence. In sum, your assertion that this discussion can only be about Muslims since all suicide bombers are Muslim is flat out wrong. Not only are not all suicide bombers Muslim, they aren’t the first and they aren’t the most prolific (Hindu marxists in Sri Lanka come in first place.) You should read Robert Pape’s “Dying to Win,” a study of every documented suicide attack. Pape found that terrorism is linked to foreign occupations, and not to religion.
If you want to understand suicide bombing and terrorism, you have to analyze the conditions that produce it. The attempt to ignore the violence that goes on and instead focus on the Quran (which in no way condones suicide, terrorism, or any attack on non-military personnel during wartime) is the real diversion. It’s a way to ignore the truth in order to bash Muslims.
A
Alexius
Guest
How does a suicide bomber think?
In the case of those who set off the bombs in Madrid, they didn’t grow up together. Rather, it was when they were in the university, that they met and became friendly. They were not suicidal or thinking of killing at that point. As time went by, they became more secluded from others until they became so close knit, that they never spoke to anyone outside their circle. They would do everything as a group. Discussions revolved around politics. That is when they gradually decided to act against what they saw as a corrupt Spanish government. All of the instructions they got were from the internet - the bombs were made from a manual on the internet, aswell. Everything was coordinated and they trained to think of people, not as people, but as inanimate objects. In that way, they were able to overcome the emotional consequences. On the day of the attacks, they drove to a center point, and dispersed from there. This would be the last time they would make contact with each other, so it was up to each of them to keep himself disciplined and not back down. Of course, these men were not “suicide” bombers, but the same thinking process applies to them. They also set a bomb under the seat of their car…
Prayers and petitions,
Alexius
In the case of those who set off the bombs in Madrid, they didn’t grow up together. Rather, it was when they were in the university, that they met and became friendly. They were not suicidal or thinking of killing at that point. As time went by, they became more secluded from others until they became so close knit, that they never spoke to anyone outside their circle. They would do everything as a group. Discussions revolved around politics. That is when they gradually decided to act against what they saw as a corrupt Spanish government. All of the instructions they got were from the internet - the bombs were made from a manual on the internet, aswell. Everything was coordinated and they trained to think of people, not as people, but as inanimate objects. In that way, they were able to overcome the emotional consequences. On the day of the attacks, they drove to a center point, and dispersed from there. This would be the last time they would make contact with each other, so it was up to each of them to keep himself disciplined and not back down. Of course, these men were not “suicide” bombers, but the same thinking process applies to them. They also set a bomb under the seat of their car…
Prayers and petitions,
Alexius
C
chosen_people
Guest
That’s exactly what we’ve been trying to discuss. What sort of people are so full of hate so lacking in basic human decency
and morals that they do these acts. Why doesn’t it occur to me to strap a bomb on myself and blow up people because a Palestinian Arab terrorist killed my cousin, or because an ancestor of mine was burned alive at the stake for refusing to covert to Christianity or because members of my family died in the Holocaust. You want to discuss the reasons why a bumch of rich saudi arabians felt they were so oppressed that they crashed two planes into the WTC killing some 3,000 people? Okay agreed, they didn’t like American Middle East policy, they hate the U.S.A - where have we gotten. What do we do now? Surrender to terrorism? Adopt the Hamas charter of hate? Maybe they’ll let us live. Let’s ask them…
The reason that I and the other people on this thread are unable to give you want you want is because no normal decent human being can ever accept as a legitimate moral act the walking into a bakery in Israel this week and killing three innocent unarmed workers on the basis that they are legitimate targets simply because they are Jews. There is no justification, no excuse, no need to examine anything. Any discussion as to the “reasons” behind these acts is tantamount to giving legitimacy to these acts. It is lowering ourselves to their immorality, it is adopting their hate. No! The family members of the three innocent victims from the bakery are not allowed to now go and blow up the next innocent palestinian arab they see because of the terrorist act against them or because of any other social or political reason. If they did, there are no circumstane where we would find it acceptable.
The same society that produces suicide bombers also has “family honour killings” where a brother murders his sister because let’s say she’s been having premarital sex and therefore brought “disgrace” to her family. You can discuss with me and others here all you want about the status of honour and family in that society or the status of women in that society. You can try and bring examples of similar examples of “honour killings” in other societies. What you will not be able to do is to convince us that an “honour killing” is anything other than brutal murder just as you will be unable to convince any normal moral human being that suicide terrorists who kill civillians are anything other than dispicable murderers.
- Status