Jews in the Quran, by Robert Spencer

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

52 Responses to Jews in the Quran, by Robert Spencer

  1. θ says:

    The peace process in Israel -Palestine conflict can’t be imposed or ruined by the intervention of the US – such as moving embassy to Jerusalem.
    Peace will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the imposition of Pro-Israel policy by the United States.

  2. θ says:

    Any settler’s funding by the US officials, even a slightly endorsement of Israeli illegal settlements by the US officials is an act of undoing the Peace process and intervention against what the US politicians termed as “Peace will only come through direct negotiations between the parties”.

  3. θ says:

    The Israeli use of American weaponry, ammo, military equipment, even annual military aid package from the US throighout Gaza and the West Bank is is an act of undoing the Peace process and intervention against what the US politicians termed as “Peace will only come through direct negotiations between the parties”.

  4. θ says:

    The concept of “Peace will only come through direct negotiations between the parties” makes any cooperation – either military or civilian purposes – between the US and Israel in Gaza and the West Bank an enemy and obstacle of Peace.

  5. θ says:

    Any attendance of the US officials of the events sponsored by the Pro-illegal settlers groups is an act of undoing the Peace process and intervention against what the US politicians termed as “Peace will only come through direct negotiations between the parties”.

    Let that phrase restrain the Americans from being Pro-Israel.

  6. θ says:

    Approval of the US and the UN Security Council of Resolution 2334 against Israeli illegal settlements, on December 23, 2016.

    The Security Council,
    Reaffirming its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 446 (1979), 452 (1979), 465 (1980), 476 (1980), 478 (1980), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003), and 1850 (2008), Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force, Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice, Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions, Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines,
    Recalling the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap, endorsed by its resolution 1515 (2003), for a freeze by Israel of all settlement activity, including “natural growth”, and the dismantlement of all settlement outposts erected since March 2001, Recalling also the obligation under the Quartet roadmap for the Palestinian Authority Security Forces to maintain effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons, Condemning all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement and destruction, Reiterating its vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders, Stressing that the status quo is not sustainable and that significant steps, consistent with the transition contemplated by prior agreements, are urgently needed in order to (i) stabilize the situation and to reverse negative trends on the ground, which are steadily eroding the two-State solution and entrenching a one-State reality, and (ii) to create the conditions for successful final status negotiations and for advancing the two-State solution through those negotiations and on the ground,

    1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;
    2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard;
    3. Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;
    4. Stresses that the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-State solution, and calls for affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperilling the two-State solution;
    5. Calls upon all States, bearing in mind paragraph 1 of this resolution, to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967;
    6. Calls for immediate steps to prevent all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation and destruction, calls for accountability in this regard, and calls for compliance with obligations under international law for the strengthening of ongoing efforts to combat terrorism, including through existing security coordination, and to clearly condemn all acts of terrorism;
    7. Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law, including international humanitarian law, and their previous agreements and obligations, to observe calm and restraint, and to refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric, with the aim, inter alia, of de-escalating the situation on the ground, rebuilding trust and confidence, demonstrating through policies and actions a genuine commitment to the two-State solution, and creating the conditions necessary for promoting peace;
    8. Calls upon all parties to continue, in the interest of the promotion of peace and security, to exert collective efforts to launch credible negotiations on all final status issues in the Middle East peace process and within the time frame specified by the Quartet in its statement of 21 September 2010;
    9. Urges in this regard the intensification and acceleration of international and regional diplomatic efforts and support aimed at achieving, without delay a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap and an end to the Israeli occupation that began in 1967; and underscores in this regard the importance of the ongoing efforts to advance the Arab Peace Initiative, the initiative of France for the convening of an international peace conference, the recent efforts of the Quartet, as well as the efforts of Egypt and the Russian Federation;
    10. Confirms its determination to support the parties throughout the negotiations and in the implementation of an agreement;
    11. Reaffirms its determination to examine practical ways and means to secure the full implementation of its relevant resolutions;
    12. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council every three months on the implementation of the provisions of the present resolution;
    13. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

  7. θ says:

    Achievement of Israel in the Middle East, it can exert a powerful pressure on Arab’s heads to end “Arab solidarity” at a time when the trend of the world is ironically towards a tribal identity. Weird.

  8. θ says:

    Islam for the Non-Arab Moslems in Asia, Africa, Europe and America means peace, but sadly for the Arabs it means “pieces”.

  9. θ says:

    The UN Security Council of Resolution 2334 is as the new year gift from the world to Palestine.

  10. Anonymous says:

    The possible upcoming clash between the U.N. and the US is a very great opportunity to replace and change the position of the United States with other nation (such as German, or Japan, or India, or Brasil, or Indonesia, or Turkey or else) for one of of 5 seats of the permanent members of the U.N.
    Let the U.N. be more mature and dependent from any US’ influence after 70th years. Let the world prove that without the US the U.N. can move on.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Bear in mind, wherever the US withdraws itself from a space of influence, other nation would eagerly fill the vacuum as soon as possible.

  12. Anonymous says:

    The more both Israel and the US get isolated and stay away from the worldly influence, the more other nations fill the privilege of “veto holder”. Only a stupid nation plays with a seat of UNSC permanent members.

  13. Anonymous says:

    I believe, just like being the host the world Olympics, other nations would not hesitate even to pay so much money and incentives – such as Germany or Japan or Brasil or Indonesia or Turkey – to get just one seat of the UNSC permanent members.

  14. Anonymous says:

    More loss would rather inflict the United States if it tries to mess with the U.N. since its seat as veto holder in the UNSC could be auctioned to other nations .

  15. Anonymous says:

    The end of the United States’ seat in the UNSC would very much mean the end of the American imperialism and influence throughout the world. And Israel would be blamed for that.
    The seat of the US can be auctioned to the highest bidder.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Contrary to what the Americans and Israelis assumed, actually the American imperial influence needs the U.N. more.

  17. Anonymous says:

    The UN should challenge the United States to immediately leave its seat as one of the UNSC permanent member if American politicians try to bluff the UN with the funding.

  18. Anonymous says:

    The UN should ensure that any effort of de-funding by the US means the loss of a veto seat in the UNSC permanent members.
    It means the reduction, even the end, of American influence, and the end of the Israeli patron in the worldly scale.

  19. Anonymous says:

    This is a possible domino effect: End of Israeli settlers, de-funding of the UN by the US, the end of US seat in UNSC, the end of American influence in the world, the end of Israeli patron.

  20. θ says:

    After the time of UNSC Resolution, suddenly Israel complains a lot in diplomatic sense, but what is funny is, it complains to none but to itself since no other nation hears it, no other nation supports Israeli illegal settlements any longer. Israel proves that it has no friend.

  21. Anonymous says:

    After UNSC Resolution 2334, which describes Israeli settlements as illegal, there’s no riot or escalation of tension whatsoever in Israel and Palestine, hence it is not obstacle of peace. But any plan of moving the US embassy to Jerusalem will potentially cause the bloody conflicts, even maybe the uprisong known as intifada that pleases the radicals, hence the idea is obstacle of peace.

  22. Anonymous says:

    UNSC Resolution 2334 does not pose any problem for the peace process between Palestine and Israel, simply worsens a bad relation into diplomatic clash between Israel and outgoing Government in the US.

  23. Anonymous says:

    It is too ridiculous beyond the pale for the Jews to ask today’s American politicians to confirm 3,500 years of Jewish history as a serious argument for the state of Israel, because it means the Jews also ask those same politicians to let the Native Indian Americas segregate from the US by conforming Indian’s 12,000 years of history in America.

    The UNSC Resolution 2334 utterly ends entire claim of Jewish illegal settlements in three ways. First, it effectively abrogates a dubious UNSC Res. 242 of 1967 which formed the basis of Israeli deceptive “state-colony” (between legal Israel and illegal settlers) for the past 49 years.
    Second, Res. 2334 gives a strategic boost to the international campaign to focus on boycotting the Jewish illegal settlers rather than the Israel state.
    Third, Res 2334 finally gives what the Palestine wants, that is a clear separation of Israel as a recognised state from the gangs of Jewish criminals who illegally robbed the Palestine lands.

    Resolution 242 deals with Israel and its Arab neighbors whereas Res. 2334 deals with the Jewish criminals and Palestine.
    Res. 242 stipulated that in exchange for Arab recognition of Israel’s right to exist, Israel has to cede Arab’s territories it robbed during the war as major concession, as manifested in Camp David Accords and Oslo Accords. But Res. 2334 gives no excuse whatsoever for the gangs of Jewish illegal settlers to claim the lands they robbed.

    Resolution 242 assumed that Israel won’t legalise the illegal settlers, whereas Res. 2334 finally determines that Israel doesn’t and can’t legalise the illegal settlers.

    Resolution 242 is deliberately phrased to open a possibility that Israel may give up certain cities of Haifa, Acre, or Northern Israel to Arabs (as resolution speaks of “territories,” rather than “the territories” or “all the territories”), but Res. 2334 asserts that the Jewish illegal settlers have no right to any of the Palestine lands they robbed *after* Israel took control.

    From the Western Wall to Shiloh, from Hebron to Ariel, the UNSC Res. 2334 confirms all settlers’ presence in the areas beyond the 1949 armistice lines is a crime.

    Given that Jewish settlers have no right to claim territory under Res. 2334, it naturally follows that the Palestinians have no incentive to give up their lands to those Jewish robbers for peace. The peace process – that is the two-state solution – awakes more effectively and more stronger from the evening when the raucous applause of all Security Council members accompanied the abstention of the US.

    Res. 2334 strengthens the strategical boycott of “Jewish illegal settlements.” It carefully avoids a prejudice to boycott Israel as a state.

  24. Anonymous says:

    Resolution 242 deals with Israel and its Arab neighbors without mentioning Palestine state, whereas Res. 2334 deals with the Jewish criminals and Palestine state.

  25. Anonymous says:

    //www.memri.org/reports/egyptian-daily-close-egyptian-intelligence-reveals-minutes-secret-palestinian-authority-1
    Erekat: If U.S. Embassy Is Moved To Jerusalem, We Will Call To Expel U.S. Embassies From Arab And Muslim Countries
    “When Susan Rice asked what the Palestinian response would be if the U.S. Embassy was moved to Jerusalem, or if a new settlement bloc was annexed, Erekat responded: ‘We will directly and immediately join 16 international organizations, withdraw the PLO’s recognition of Israel, and cut back our security, political, and economic ties with the Israeli occupation regime, and we will hold it fully responsible for the PA’s collapse.
    Furthermore, we will [call] on the Arab and Islamic peoples to expel U.S. Embassies from their capitals.’
    Rice answered Erekat by saying: ‘It seems that future matters could be very complicated, and we are all apprehensive about sitting down with Erekat because of his absolute knowledge of these matters, and because of his memory and his sincerity.’
    She expressed the American side’s respect and friendship for Erekat, and apologized for yelling at him in March 2014.”

  26. Anonymous says:

    //www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/trump-once-donated-10000-to-a-west-bank-israeli-settlement/2016/12/18/b8aa418c-c53a-11e6-acda-59924caa2450_story.html
    By Ruth Eglash December 18, 2016
    In 2003, President-elect Donald Trump donated $10,000 to institutions in one of Israel’s oldest and most steadfast West Bank settlements, one of the community’s founders told an Israeli radio station on Sunday.
    Yaakov “Katzele” Katz, one of the original settlers of Beit El, said on the radio that Trump had made the donation in honor of his good friend and Jewish adviser David Friedman, now Trump’s pick to be the next U.S. ambassador to Israel. Friedman, a New York lawyer, serves as president of the American Friends of Bet El Institutions.
    Katz told the radio station that more than a decade ago, the settlement honored Friedman at a gala dinner in New York. It was then that Trump made his donation.
    “If I would have known he would be elected president, I would have saved the check,” Katz said. He said that Friedman was like a brother to him. The two have been friends for 40 years.
    Beit El was established in 1977 on a hill on the outskirts of the de facto Palestinian capital of Ramallah. Today, about 1,300 families live in the settlement. As well as the yeshiva, the settlers there also run a pre-military academy and house one of Israel’s most right-wing media outlets, Arutz Sheva.

  27. Anonymous says:

    The group that opposes 2-State Solution and eagerly prefers 1-state Solution is Hamas of Gaza. If Israel withdrew from the idea 2-State Solution, Hamas wins the bet over the Palestine Authorities.
    1-State Solution paves the way for Hamas’s total elimination of all Jews because for the extremists two different races (Arabs and Jews) can’t be in one state.

  28. Anonymous says:

    The idea 2-State Solution needs to be imposed externally by the UN since realistically no one of today’s belligerent sides of the conflict (Israel, Hamas, Palestine Authorities) wants to appear or to be accused of being the “seller out” of their ancestor’s homeland.

    Nevertheless, Israel doesn’t either want to annex all Jerusalem, Gaza and the West Bank because it means the Jews declare an all-out holy-war against all Moslem world.

    In the meantime, Hamas of Gaza doesn’t have a strong committed state as the backer – who has the courage to deploy its ground troops and military resources for the sake of Hamas’ regime – to eliminate all Jews from Israel.

  29. Anonymous says:

    What the Palestine needs is not a diplomatic ties but a kind of the committed military alliance as what Russia has showed directly in defending Assad’s regime in Syria on the battle ground. Israel steals a momentum to have the most pro-Israel America in History, so how about Iran and the rest of Arab states? Would they let the upcoming US leaders lead Israel to exterminate the Palestine?

    //www.algemeiner.com/2017/01/03/top-tehran-official-iran-will-keep-supporting-anti-israel-terrorism-front/
    Top Tehran Official: Iran Will Keep Supporting Anti-Israel Terrorism Front
    The Islamic Republic will always back nations and groups that fight Israel, a top Iranian official vowed on Tuesday, the Tehran regime-aligned Tasnim news agency reported.
    Speaking to reporters in the Iranian capital, Ali Akbar Velayti — a senior adviser to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — said Iran’s “stance is unchanging and that is providing full and continued support for the resistance line, which begins from Iran and passes through Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and reaches Palestine.”
    Explaining Iran’s ongoing effort to bolster the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad, Velayti stated, “Given that Syria is an important link in the chain of resistance, the Islamic Republic of Iran has sided with the country’s people and government since the very beginning of the regional and international conspiracy against Syria, and will continue to do so.”
    When Iranian officials speak of “resistance groups,” they are generally referring to Tehran-backed anti-Western and anti-Israel terrorist organizations, such as Hamas and Hezbollah. The term is also used by Iran to describe the Houthis in Yemen, who are receiving Iranian support as they battle for control of that southern Arabian Peninsula country against the Saudi-backed government of Yemeni President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi.
    At the end of November, IDF Brig. Gen. (res.) Yosef Kuperwasser — a former director-general of Israel’s Ministry of International Affairs and Strategy — told The Algemeiner that Iran was stepping up the speed at which it was arming its proxies in the Middle East due to its fear that after Donald Trump assumes the US presidency in January, its room to maneuver in Syria will be greatly hampered.
    Last month, Hamas’ representative in Tehran declared ties between the Gaza-ruling Islamist terror group and the Iranian regime were “getting better every day.”

  30. θ says:

    The peace process in Israel-Palestine conflict can’t be imposed or ruined by the intervention of the US – such as moving the US embassy to Jerusalem. “Peace will only come through direct negotiations between the parties”, and not through the imposition of Pro-Israel policy by the United States.

    Since when has Israel become the 51st state of the US? Since when have the American lawmakers got paid by the taxpayers as the representatives of Israel?

    Do the American politicians have a double loyalty and double nationality?

    Any settler’s funding by the US officials, even a slightly endorsement of Israeli illegal settlements by the US officials is an act of undoing the Peace process and intervention against what the US politicians termed as “Peace will only come through direct negotiations between the parties”.

    The Israeli use of American weaponry, ammo, military equipment, even annual military aid package from the US throighout Gaza and the West Bank is is an act of undoing the Peace process and intervention against what the US politicians termed as “Peace will only come through direct negotiations between the parties”.

    The concept of “Peace will only come through direct negotiations between the parties” makes any cooperation – either military or civilian purposes – between the US and Israel in Gaza and the West Bank an enemy and obstacle of Peace.

    Any attendance of the US officials of the events sponsored by the Pro-illegal settlers groups is an act of undoing the Peace process and intervention against what the US politicians termed as “Peace will only come through direct negotiations between the parties”. Let that phrase restrain the Americans from being Pro-Israel.

  31. Anonymous says:

    Since when have the city of Jerusalem and the illegal Jewish settlements around the West Bank become a part of the US?

  32. Anonymous says:

    Since when has the American department had to suffer, bowed down and served a foreign state Israel?
    Certain American politicians are traitors that have double loyalty and double nationality, they don’t hesitate to suffer Americans to serve Israelis.

    //freebeacon.com/issues/congress-freeze-state-department-funds-u-s-embassy-moves-jerusalem/
    Congress to Freeze State Department Funds Until U.S. Embassy Moves to Jerusalem
    A delegation of Republican senators is moving forward with an effort to freeze some funding to the State Department until the U.S. embassy in Israel is formally moved to Jerusalem, according to new legislation.
    The legislation comes as the Obama administration continues to face criticism over its behind-the-scenes effort to forward a United Nations resolution condemning Israel.
    The Obama administration, like previous administrations, does not formally recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital city and has worked to stymie efforts to move the U.S. embassy there.
    While Congress first approved legislation to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem in 1995, the new bill threatens to cut State Department funding until the relocation is complete.
    The effort is being spearheaded by Sens. Ted Cruz (R., Texas), Marco Rubio (R., Fla.), and Dean Heller (R., Nev.), all of whom support efforts by the incoming Trump administration to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem after years of debate.

  33. Anonymous says:

    Abbas: UNSC resolution says settlements illegitimate, not Israel
    UNSC resolution 2334, which was passed on December 23, said that settlements “have no legal validity” and constitute an obstacle to peace.

    //www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Abbas-UNSC-Resolution-2334-did-not-say-Israel-is-illegitimate-477664
    UN Security Council resolution 2334 was not an anti-Israel decision, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said on Thursday evening, speaking to a group of some 200 Israeli activists, professors, and former officials.

    “UNSC resolution 2334 was not against Israel; it was against settlements, no more, no less,” Abbas told the Israelis, who traveled from all over Israel to meet with the PA president at the Mukata, the PA presidential headquarters in Ramallah. “It did not say Israel is illegitimate; it said settlements are illegitimate.”

    UNSC resolution 2334, which was passed on December 23, said that settlements “have no legal validity” and constitute an obstacle to peace.
    While Palestinian officials have welcomed the resolution, characterizing it as “historic,” Israeli officials have rejected the resolution, calling it “shameful.”

    Abbas, who was in good spirits using hand motions as he spoke, added that he and the Palestinian leadership vehemently oppose violence.
    “We don’t believe in violence, terrorism, or extremism and we will fight all of [these phenomena] openly and secretly,” Abbas remarked emphatically. “We have no other choice but to live in peace.”

    Since assuming the presidency of the PA in 2005, Abbas has consistently eschewed violence and strongly supported security cooperation between the IDF and PA security forces.
    The PA security forces have foiled hundreds of attacks against Israelis over the past year and a half, according to PA intelligence Chief Majid Faraj.
    Leading the Israeli delegation, Uri Avnery, a former parliamentarian and peace activist, called on the Israeli and Palestinian sides to sit at the negotiating table to achieve a peace accord.

    “Peace between Israelis and Palestinians will not come without cooperation. We cannot achieve peace if the two sides are not sitting together,” Avnery, sitting alongside Abbas, said.
    Avnery, who is 93 years old, also recalled the days when he visited Abbas and former PA President Yasser Arafat in Tunisia.
    “I met Abbas in Tunis; we have been friends for more than 35 years,” Avnery remarked, glancing at the PA president. “Abu Ammar (Arafat) always told me ‘to sit and discuss with Abbas first and then come to me.’”

    Later in his speech, Abbas said that he would be willing to resume negotiations with Israel, if it implements a settlement freeze.
    “Freeze settlements and lets sit at the table. Nothing is impossible with good intentions,” Abbas stated, grabbing on to the hand of Avnery. “50 years of occupation, then what? Another 50 years? Why haven’t we reached peace? We want to reach peace when we are living, not when we are dead.”

    For his part, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said he will meet Abbas, but without preconditions such as a settlement freeze.
    Abbas also stated that he is looking forward to the upcoming international peace conference in Paris.
    “All the respect to the French Initiative….What is needed from the French Initiative? We want international legitimacy to create a basis for peace.” Abbas remarked. “We want international legitimacy to create a basis for peace. I believe it can be done in one day, even one hour.”

    Abbas and the Palestinian leadership have vigorously lobbied for a peace conference to create a multilateral mechanism to oversee the peace process similar to that of the P5+1, which negotiated the Iran nuclear agreement.
    At the conclusion of his speech, the 81-year-old Palestinian leader thanked the group of Israelis for coming, saying that their arrival in Ramallah sends an important message.

    “You coming here today is sufficient for us to make peace now. What separates us? You have come to take part in peace,” Abbas stated to a round of applause, adding: “The truth is we didn’t need the UN resolution, it is enough for us to talk and we can get to peace.
    “The only way is for us to live here, together, in this land in peace.”

    Abbas has met with multiple groups of Israelis including government officials and civil society members over the past year.
    During a recent Fatah leadership conference, Abbas dismissed criticism of his meetings with Israelis, saying that it is important to inform Israelis of the Palestinian narrative.
    After his speech, Abbas quickly returned to his office, but returned minutes later to take pictures with his Israeli guests.

  34. Anonymous says:

    Chicken and egg dilemma.
    In order to get a formal recognition from Palestine, it is a must for Israel to recognise “Palestine” as a state first. Otherwise there’s no recognition.

    Peace Process between Israel and Palestine has nothing to do with the Jewish illegal settlements. Illegal settlers in the West Bank are in fact Palestine internal issues.

  35. Anonymous says:

    Just as Israel handle the fates of Arab Israelis and Arab Bedouins, Israel should leave Jewish illegal settlers into the decisions and rulings of the Palestine Authorities.

  36. Anonymous says:

    Why do Arab Israelis and Arab Bedouins never become an obstacle of Peace Process whereas the Jewish illegal settlers keep being a reason for Israel to question, invalidate and obstruct the 2-State Solution, even to mingle, intervene, and interfere the nationalism of the Palestine Authorities.

  37. madmanna says:

    Arabs chose to settle the issue by war and they lost.

    So stop boring me with your political ramblings.

    Go and get the land back by honourable means of warfare, not killing women, children and civilians.

    Your religion is false because your non-existent god Allah cannot raise up an army to beat Israel in a fair fight on open ground away from civilians.

    All you can do is attack and kill civilians in a cowardly manner by any means possible.

    The cowardly mujahadeen of Islam, inspired by their assassinating prophet, kill women, babies and children asleep in their beds and old men at worship. Then they are celebrated as heroes.

    Shame on you and your ilk.

  38. θ says:

    “Madmanna says: Arabs chose to settle the issue by war and they lost.”

    Israel may win a battle initially, but loses the war afterward.
    Hadn’t the US also lost a preliminary war on the Pearl Harbor attack?

    “Madmanna says: Go and get the land back by honourable means of warfare.”

    Do you think the Arabs think it is about the land, eh? Too predictable. Even Egypt just easily gives two islands to Arab Saudi in a show of gratitude and Arabian friendship, no big deal.
    The Palestine State is about the 3rd holiest mosque of Islam. It is about a grand design of ending a silly Messianic belief of the Evangelists and the Zionists.
    Now, Arabs have the world, the U.N., the Europeans, even American Jews on their sides to end that silly racial belief.

    “Madmanna says: Shame on you and your ilk.”

    Allah doesn’t approve terrorism, but the devils who support the Non-Moslems do. The Arabs rarely won by using terrors because Allah and Prophet Muhammad didn’t approve it.

    In 1945, the devils helped the Allies win the World War 2 on the Europe Fronts against other devils that helped Nazis. The Allies launched terrorism of carpet-bombing the civilian city of Dresden.

    On the Pacific Fronts, the devils helped Allies win the World War 2 against other devils that helped Japanese empire. The Allies launched two unprecedented acts of terrorism of dropping two nuclear bombs over the civilian cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    In 1940s, the devils helped some Israeli terrorist gangs win – Irgun, Lehi, Haganah, et cetera – by using savage terrorism against the Britons (by the bombing of King David Hotel) and against the Arabs (with Deir Yassin massacre, Plan Dalet).

  39. θ says:

    “Madmanna says: Your religion is false because your non-existent god Allah cannot raise up an army to beat Israel in a fair fight on open ground away from civilians.”

    Just as Umar Ibn al-Khattab enters Jerusalem without a sword, or Saladin enter Jerusalem calmly, the Jordanian Waqf miraculously retains a key of the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa. Moshe Dayan may win a battle but the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem won the war.

    Til these days, despite his warfare conquest, the Jews routinely cursed the Rabbinical chiefs and Dayan’s stunning decision of handing over the Jerusalem’s key to the Grand Mufti.
    They just seek the land, we Moslems seek more than that, i.e. the Faith.

    So, where’s actually the victory of the Jews after Dayan and the Rabbis surrender religiously to the Grand Mufti?

  40. θ says:

    “madmanna says: Then they are celebrated as heroes.”

    The Hollywood has a great credit of giving an image that the Arab terrorists never win. But Saladin is a good hero. We Moslems agree with that.
    Allah doesn’t approve terrorism. The Arabs rarely won by using terrors because Allah and Prophet Muhammad didn’t approve it.

  41. θ says:

    When being presented by a news of many failed and botched terrors by the Arabs, as well as the insignificant achievement their terrors have yielded, Moslems usually just shrug off by stating or yawning that it is a proof that Allah doesn’t approve the Arab terrors.

    It is not a decisive result of terrors that caused early Moslems regain again the city of Makkah.

  42. Anonymous says:

    Usually the Western terrorists seem to not enjoy a greater terror they inflicted in the wars (from Crusades, Native Americas genocide, the World War, Holocaust, et cetera), they tend to conceal it, deny it, turn apologetic of it, they can’t deny how they are ashamed of it, and don’t invite the others to do it.
    On other hands, the Arab terrorists seemingly enjoy violence they do so much, they find some fun of it, even unbelievably don’t hide their desire to gain some fame from it because for them doing a terror is for living or a carrier continuously. They are incapable of doing other decent jobs. Worse they shamelessly invite the others too.

  43. θ says:

    In the Non-Islam religion, doing a justice thru retaliation or vengeance doesn’t bring any blessing or redemption whatsoever. It is just a morally choice based on a “rational” necessity, such as “if not I, who else would do it?”.
    But in Islamic theology, doing a justice thru retaliation subjectively can bestow either the atonement (if failed) or a blessing (if succeeded).

  44. θ says:

    Israel can’t seriously seek the peace as long as Israel keeps worrying and questions the peace commitment of the Palestine state rather than questioning and proving the peace commitment of Israel itself to Palestine state.

  45. Anonymous says:

    Israel can’t judge Palestine’s commitment of peace at time when the peace itself doesn’t exist yet.
    Only after recognising Palestine then Israel could evaluate the peace commitment of Palestine.

  46. Anonymous says:

    What is funny is, Israel claims having its version of the commitment of peace by just questioning, worrying, doubting the commitment of peace of Palestine.

  47. Anonymous says:

    What is funnier is, the PA keeps making mistakes by accepting “unity government” of Hamas rather than dominating or even dissolving Hamas by a “coup” commutation.

  48. Anonymous says:

    Unity of Palestinians is different than unity of government. It is a bad PR for the Palestine to have “unity gov” at time Palestine needs the International supports rather than a firework producer.

  49. Anonymous says:

    When will the PA play the game of diplomacy so well?

  50. Anonymous says:

    At time when the Palestine gets the high supports abroad, Palestine hampers it with a blunder of witnessing an invitation of a “unity gov” from Hamas. Always like that.

  51. Anonymous says:

    And then, when the International supports waned or got soured, the Palestine Authorities alone would raise by itself on the feet to restart the diplomacy. That’s very unwise.

  52. Anonymous says:

    Palestine doesn’t need a “unity gov” to have Unity of Palestinians. They are different.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s