Poll for Americans

[khilafah]

This poll is specifically aimed at Americans, specifically those who support Israel, but any Americans should answer it.

If the Muslims decided that the state of Texas, historically belongs to our ancestors (and we produce a religious document establishing it), and we began mass immigrating into that land, with the intention of forming a new Islamic State there, and dispossessing the people of their land, what would be your reaction?

If you like you can replace Texas with your state, and then vote in this poll.

Thanks.

P.S Please feel free to express why you voted as you did, and to add any specific details that aren't mentioned in the choice you made.

[khilafah]

A little something extra, try to imagine your family had not only lived where they do for the last few generations (what is it 300-400 years max for most?) imagine they'd lived on that same property, perhaps working the same farm for the past 1200 years.

Also for any non-Americans, just replace Texas or whatever with your country and feel free to vote also.

[Malcom]

Your poll: you left out the Live in peace option. I live in the largest population of Arabs in America, even after 911 there was no "antiArab" violence. We live together in peace, they own businesses, hold political office, are members of media....use "the system" to get what they want and need. We talk, work, play and even pray together. It's a good option, one that shouldn't be left out.

[ive said a bad]

I agree that you left out the best option, in my neighborhood, they'd most likely get a handshake and maybe even some cookies.

Quick responses anyhow.

Why form a militia, are they killing to take land? This would be against US law and the military or police forces (depending on the scale of attack) would be called in. If they bought the house next door, most likely choc chip.

Why lobby foreign gov't for anything, we are the ones everyone always asks for help, if it was needed we would have support almost immediately, no lobbying required.

What deal? They come here and live by our laws, which gives them the right to purchase land, as much as they want. If they want to "take" land, again it would become a police or military issue, if needed to fight (although I'm a little old and for that) I'd be right there.

Fourth and final answer, if this were even an option, I would have no right to ever ask for it back. I am personally not so weak that I would allow anyone to forcefully take my home. I can't imagine being dumb enough to go break down the door of my great grand-parents home and demand it back since it was theirs 45 years ago. Fortunately, I live in a place where that is highly unlikely to happen.

[sinbad]

Well, they have...and they are generally welcome as long as they embrace teh American way (and they generally do). So I select:

None of the above.

[sinbad]

By the way, I was only answering teh short question in teh actual poll. Not the ridiculous hypothetical situation in the first post.

[sinbad]

Ughhh!!!

the the the the the the the the the

See, I can type it correctly :)

[USMC]

"A little something extra, try to imagine your family had not only lived where they do for the last few generations (what is it 300-400 years max for most?) imagine they'd lived on that same property, perhaps working the same farm for the past 1200 years."

By your argument then the arabs are the intruders.
Check your history. God gave that land to Abraham and his seed 4000-5000 years ago.
Stupid poll by the way. Shows your ignorance of the U.S., it's history, and its laws.

[kaphirgoyim]

Did they come peacefully?

[khilafah]

Every single one of you has completely misunderstood the concept, and I don't know if it's pureposefully or not.

The Muslims would be arriving illegally, with the declared intention to turn Texas (or replace with your state) into an independant Muslim state, which has no American government, nor American way of life. The people would be bringing a new and foriegn way of life, and would be forming militias of their own, in order to achieve this. They would also start moving from village to village asking the residents to evacuate, and informing them that the other American states would prefer them living in them, because this is now a Muslim state for Muslims.

The option for peace is there, it's option number 3, agree to share the land with them, giving them the majority of it.

USMC,

By your argument then the arabs are the intruders.

Palestinians are made up of Jewish, Greek and Arab backgrounds, they are not purely Arabs. Most of them were Christians before the Muslims opened the land, and they converted to Islam over the next 100 years.

Check your history. God gave that land to Abraham and his seed 4000-5000 years ago.

Check your geneologies, Arabs are seed of Abraham (pbuh).

Stupid poll by the way. Shows your ignorance of the U.S., it's history, and its laws.

It';s got nothing to do with American history or laws. It's a hypothetical future occurence, which would result in abolishing ALL American laws in the said state, and forming a new and independant Islamic State based on the laws we decided, ie. Islamic Laws.

Now I'd like to see some reaction to this poll, don't be afraid your hypocrisy is going to be exposed.

[kaphirgoyim]

We would have our OWN government take care of it. That is why we pay our taxes. (So modified option #2). We don't need foreign intervention for domestic issues.

[khilafah]

Ok,

We would have our OWN government take care of it. That is why we pay our taxes. (So modified option #2).

So far you've done exactly the same as the Palestinians did, they called on the Arab governments aronud them to solve the issue. That failed.. and the land was taken by the invaders, what now? Now make your choice.

If you want to make this more correct to the historical event, imagine the USA is fragmented into small and weak states (like the Islamic [ottoman] empire was at the time of this invasion) and that a large and hostile superpower (such as China) is overseeing the immigration of these Muslims and the plans to draw up an Islamic state in your state...

so now how do you vote?

[Paranoia]

I think that most of us Americans are not respecting your poll khilafah, because it's a not-so-thinly veiled attempt at drawing a parallel analogy between the Israel / Palestine situation. It begs for Americans to show hypocrisy. I agree that it makes one think empathetically and that's never bad, but it does it such an insulting and obvious way.
It really isn't a poll at all. It's a statement and a criticism.

But even if I as an American took your poll face value and answered it, it begs for more discussion and validation on many points. Are you asking for our emotional response? Something like empathy? Or are you saying that what if it actually happened and what would our true "real life" response be?
Are you hypothesizing on a physically real possible situation or asking for what we'd think if it happened to us, so as to share the sorrow that is the Palestinians.

If the same situation occurred in the US as what happened in the middle east, the same outcome would occur. War, death, etc.
Because of you using the current state of the US and a somewhat defined size of Texas, it would take very little effort to overthrow these immigrants nowadays and soon all would be as it was. As if it didn't occur soon after.
The other 49 states could easily overpower such a state and would.
You're not accounting for the disproportion between the invaders and the previous occupants. If Israel are the invaders you want to cite, they are also better armed. For your analogy to work, this immigrating Muslim population would have to have greater power than the US currently has....and they don't. That is, the two examples really are not interchangeable in the first place. The people of the US would likely not be induced into acts like suicide bombings for example. Because of the high polarization of feelings and blame, it's hard to be objective here. When Arabs, Muslims and Jews speak, there is never a middle-ground of opinion offered. It's always THEIR fault 100%.
The consciousness of the US is to be very skeptical about anything that is 100% anything. We never get everyone to agree on everything here.
So, with that, we in the US feel that since we don't have the consciousness to ever want to strap on a bomb belt, people that DO must be at blame too.
With that said, if Muslims (or any pure culture) forcibly or by supposed ancient doctrine somehow overtook an area of land in the US and somehow remained peaceful while doing this (somehow... somehow...), I'd say that America would be the most forgiving of any large empowered country, because we ARE a country of almost all immigrants ourselves and very tolerant of varied religions.

However, your poll is naive. If you came here forcibly, even if you had a document signed by Allah himself: You'd get your butt kicked right off the face of our land.

Are we now the pompous Americans you hoped to see? Probably.
But maybe you should try empathy here for second:
Are we not the ones who by foresight, peace and strength prepared for this situation *beforehand* so as to eliminate it's possibility in the first place and then ...oh-so-nicely also allow you the freedom of speech to speculate out loud without fear of persecution?
We are.
You should respect us, the people that can maintain peace.
Supposedly it's what you yourselves want.
If you disrespect everything about a people, you disrespect the very things that cause and support such peace.
You have a lot to learn, but you have even more to unlearn.

[ive said a bad]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by khilafah
Every single one of you has completely misunderstood the concept, and I don't know if it's pureposefully or not.

khilafah, this is kinda suprising, you are generally more level headed than most here. I don't think anyone has missed your point. I think we've all agreed this is not the same as what your trying to compare.

The Muslims would be arriving illegally, with the declared intention to turn Texas (or replace with your state) into an independant Muslim state, which has no American government, nor American way of life. The people would be bringing a new and foriegn way of life, and would be forming militias of their own, in order to achieve this. They would also start moving from village to village asking the residents to evacuate, and informing them that the other American states would prefer them living in them, because this is now a Muslim state for Muslims.

what you are purporting here is a declaration of war, not against our military or gov't, but against civilians? It sounds like a direct attack on the civilian population, I wouldn't try that in texas, with or without the backing of the US military, which they would of course have, texans happen to own quite a few guns of their own. You just might end up with a fight on your hands.

The option for peace is there, it's option number 3, agree to share the land with them, giving them the majority of it.

Again, you state that the muslims are coming en-mass and "asking" people to leave their home, not military, but regular civilians. You are not leaving an option for peace in this scenario. I would welcome anyone to live on my street, but tell me to get out of my home, I'd have to say no. Which seems peaceful to me, next move is yours.

USMC,

Palestinians are made up of Jewish, Greek and Arab backgrounds, they are not purely Arabs. Most of them were Christians before the Muslims opened the land, and they converted to Islam over the next 100 years.

Check your geneologies, Arabs are seed of Abraham (pbuh).

It';s got nothing to do with American history or laws. It's a hypothetical future occurence, which would result in abolishing ALL American laws in the said state, and forming a new and independant Islamic State based on the laws we decided, ie. Islamic Laws.

It's got everything to do with American history and laws. If you were to forcibly attack our citizens our military would respond, as well as our citizens. Hell the Texans tried this some years ago, and it didn't happen for them, it won't happen for you.

Now I'd like to see some reaction to this poll, don't be afraid your hypocrisy is going to be exposed. [/QUOTE

What is hypocritical here? This is a poor comparison to the Isreal/ Palistine issue. We are not the people that were over run by the isrealis 50 years ago, even if you really want us to be, it is not a valid comparison.

[kaphirgoyim]

The American Revolution

Then American Revolution has been labeled as the leading edge of a massive upheaval in the Western world. It was the first of revolutions, large and small, that would transform the world.

In contrast to the colonists, the British had an experienced army and command of the sea. They were led by a government that was not being challenged. It had a larger population and greater total wealth. They could move their troops from place to place by sea, while the colonists had to move via land, which hampered both troop movements and supplying them. The British quickly took seven northern ports. Later some were retaken, but by them some southern ports were taken.

This War did not place anywhere near as heavy a burden on what was to become the U.S. as did the Civil War or World War II. The Continental Army never exceeded 20,000 men. Often General Washington had only one third this many men. Maybe 10,000 men served on navy ships or aboard the larger number of privateers. About 800,000 of the colonies' 2.5 million people were men of fighting age. Many soldiers continued to practice their civilian occupation part time.

Today is believed that only a minority of the colonists' people actively supported the gaining of independence. Arms for the Patriot Cause, as its supporters labeled it, had to be imported. Some Patriot governments would not sent its troops outside the state. Some men refused to serve far from home. Many Patriot officers owed their positions to political pull and had no military training or experience. Fortunately for them, the British sent second rate generals to fight them. Before the conflict ended, the Americans were helped by the fact that the British were also fighting in Europe, the Caribbean, and even in the Orient. Ultimately the British decided winning the war wasn't worth the cost.

The Patriots were led by an articulate middle class composed of lawyers, merchants, and planters. Supporting them were radical farmers and city dwellers opposed to aristocratic privilege. Their domestic opponents were called Loyalists or Tories (after a British political party opposed to the Whig Party the Patriots favored). The Loyalists were led by wealthy landowners in the North, British civil servants, and Anglican clergy.

The War lasted nearly seven years, beginning in 1775 in Lexington, Massachusetts and ending with a skirmish at Combahee, South Carolina in August, 1782. Very little of this time was spent fighting. The British troops spent most of their time occupying a few major (port) cities. General Washing was mostly occupied in keeping an army in the field. In contrast, the war at sea was active.

Some men profited from the War by feeding, clothing, and housing troops. The Middle colonies benefited from the increased demand for food. Money was earned by some, too, by selling to the British and the Patriots' French allies.

Unable to finance the war by taxation, the Patriots' Continental Congress also resorted to printing paper money and confiscating Loyalist property. Some of what the army consumed it simply took. Through the destruction brought about by the war, the tax base shrank. Because the Patriots were fighting over British taxation, it was not politic to press people too hard for the payment of taxes. Loyalists and those not taking sides refused to pay. Taxes could not be collected from Patriots behind British lines. Borrowing was difficult when the army was not doing well, which often happened. State and national borrowing financed about 28 percent of wartime expenditures. Foreign loans accounted for eight percent.

The paper money issued by the Continental Congress combined with the specie spent by the British and the French, and a reduction in the supply of goods and services brought about by the War led to runaway inflation. (Long after the War, Americans described something really worthless as not being worth even a Continental in reference to the Continental Congress' paper money.) Prices peaked at about 135 percent of their prewar level. Soldiers found the purchasing power of their pay shrinking to near nothing, and this caused some to desert. Farmers did not want to accept Continental money in exchange for the food the army needed. This led to the seizures. Washington complained of farmers selling the British, but not to his army.

After 1777, the thirteen colonies' overseas trade rose, but foreign trade was less than it would been if there had been no war. Through British-held areas, smuggling, and purchases of British goods in other nations, some British goods were imported. Privateering brought in goods, and trade with the rest of Europe increased. Domestic manufacturing increased, causing the thirteen colonies to become more self sufficient.

After 1775, because fighting shifted to the South, New England did not experience much fighting. However, British privateers damaged its fishing and whaling fleets, and the British market for whale oil was lost. The South was the only area in which the British employed economic warfare. Besides seizing slaves and luring them into their lines with promises of freedom,, the British destroyed many buildings, crops, and livestock. Because there was no longer a British indigo subsidy, its production fell.

RIPPED FROM-
http://www.westga.edu/~cscott/history/mercan.html

[khilafah]

Paranoia,

I think that most of us Americans are not respecting your poll khilafah, because it's a not-so-thinly veiled attempt at drawing a parallel analogy between the Israel / Palestine situation.

Make no mistakes, it's not veiled at all. this is an open and honest comparison.

The obvious reason why nobody's responding is that they'd either a) need to lie to themselves and pretend they'd do what they're asking others to do (ie. accept losing your home) or b) admit they're requests of the Palestinians are hypocritical, I think this is as clear as day.

Or are you saying that what if it actually happened and what would our true "real life" response be?

This is what I'm asking, how would you deal with the situation, how do you think your community, state etc. would deal with the situation. Obviously it's going to be an emotional response, but I just want people to think honestly about how they'd feel and react, and then consider how they'd think towards someone who told them to "like it or lump it" "accept they took your land, and stop fighting them", ie. how they'd view what they themselves are doing now, if they were in the other persons shoes.

Are you hypothesizing on a physically real possible situation or asking for what we'd think if it happened to us, so as to share the sorrow that is the Palestinians.

a little bit of both, I think this is a quite real situation which could occur. Remember the inhabitants of the Ottoman state never thought it'd happen to them. "What loose bands of Jews overrunning one of our cities?". When the early Zionist leaders approached Khaleefah Abdul Hamid II in the late 1800's he laughed at their plans to even form a presence of small farming communities there, let alone a state. Because at that time, the Ottoman state, even though it was becoming weak in the international arean, was still a very powerful and mighty state.

If we consider that 200 years prior to this taking of land by the zionists, the Ottomans were at the gates of Vienna... how do you know in 200 years time America may not be fragmented, her weaponry outdated and her political influence weakened and declined? How do we know a strong China would not have desires on carving her up into easily digestable chunks? We don't know, but it's very much a possibility, and anyone who laughs at this analogy as completely impossible is simply drunk on their own nationalistic intoxicant.

As for sorrow for the Palestinians, not exactly my intent, but i guess it couldn't go astray. Just wanted people to stop and think how they'd react for a second, and keep it in mind when trying to force the Palestinians to react in a certain way. I think empathy was perhaps a better term.

If the same situation occurred in the US as what happened in the middle east, the same outcome would occur. War, death, etc.

So a people whose land has been taken from them has a bit of a right to resist? They've got something legitimate to resist and it's not peculiar to them to meet invasion with violence?

it would take very little effort to overthrow these immigrants nowadays and soon all would be as it was. As if it didn't occur soon after. The other 49 states could easily overpower such a state and would.

If the USA was divided into little statelets as the Muslim world was, and each was weakened and playedoff against another, and none possessed superior military firepower anymore, then no this would not affect my analogy in the way you predict.

There's over 50 Muslim states today (suprisingly similar number), and none of them have prevented Israel from coming into existence in our land. Likewise I'm sure the "Hypothetically strong China" could arm this new Muslim state in Texas to the teeth and give her military superiority over her new neighbours, the fragmented former United States.

If Israel are the invaders you want to cite, they are also better armed.

But they weren't when they originally came. You need to have a little imagination here, I know you'd like to do anything you can tog et out of actually directly answering this, or participating in the poll, but I also know you've thought about this, and realise you'd be doing as they did.

If it's happened before, then it's quite possible it could happen again, and in your land too. although I'd think a more realistic invader would be some Mexican tribe that used to inhabit Texas hundreds of years ago or something. If that's what you need to think about to make the analogy more real, then so be it...

The people of the US would likely not be induced into acts like suicide bombings for example.

The current sane population perhaps not, but then again neither did the original generation of Muslims who the invasion was imposed upon. But once you get generations of people who've grown up knowing NOTHING else but the occupation, it leads to an explosive mixture of oppression and resistance.

We never get everyone to agree on everything here.

We all know that national defence makes for strange bedfellows.

Most of the Palestinian resistance groups are made of of varying factions as distant from one another as staunchly nationalistic, communist and Islamic.

forcibly or by supposed ancient doctrine somehow overtook an area of land in the US and somehow remained peaceful while doing this (somehow... somehow...),

The forceful entry implies they're not peaceful. Do you think the zionists used peace to establish their state? It was forged by militias like the Irgun, the Stern Gang and the Hanagah (this last one was eventually formed into the current IDF). That is why peace today is not possible, you can't force yourself into someones land, using violence and theft, and then all of a sudden say "violence is not the solution it's time for peace" It doesn't work that way sorry.

I'd say that America would be the most forgiving of any large empowered country, because we ARE a country of almost all immigrants ourselves and very tolerant of varied religions.

Yes we all know how forgiving Americans are, as do the relatives of the 4000 Afghani civilians just murdered in Afghanistan in retaliation for an act which simply caused the destruction of one building and the loss of a few thousand lives. An act which was not even carried out by ANY of those Afghani families.

The occupation of Texas would mean losing a lot more buildings, more casualties and something much worse than a foriegn attack on your soil, but a foriegn theft of your soil.

You'd get your butt kicked right off the face of our land.

The Arabs had the EXACT same mentality to begin with.

Are we now the pompous Americans you hoped to see? Probably.

Nope, in fact yourself, and the person who posted directly after you (who I'm about to address next) have just shown me what I suspected all along. Americans are just average people like anyone else. They would defend their land from invasion, they'd stand strong and fight against an unjust invader like any other human being on this planet.

The only difference I see between Americans and "my camp" is they unfrotunately can't accept others doing it. and this I find to be a little sad and disturbing.

You should respect us, the people that can maintain peace.

If anyhitng America has been the single greatest fanner of these flames. America has unashamedly armed the Israeli's to the teeth and supported and protected her from more U.N resolutions than I care to mention. All this time she falsely claims to the world she is the "Independant peacebroker, trying, in all her altruistic benevolence, to find a just and lasting soluition to the Middle East crisis". You and I both know in our hearts this is nothing but the epitomy of hypocrisy, so please don't ask for respect, EARN IT.

You have a lot to learn, but you have even more to unlearn.

I don't thinka single human on this planet is not in need of more knowledge and the correction of current thinking, least of all me.

However, I'm not too proud, arrogant and sloshed in my own supremacy to admit this.

[khilafah]

ive said a bad,

First I'd like to say I found your response to this thread to be the best so far. You pretty much answered the poll with your post anyway, and went further and actually gave more insight into how others would react if put in this same situation, thank you.

I don't think anyone has missed your point. I think we've all agreed this is not the same as what your trying to compare.

Well, considering it's a hypothetical analogy, this means we can adjust the situation to mimmick any historical situation we liked. If there's some aspect of the analogy you found was not mimmicked correctly, then please feel free to point it out. But you must realise, like others on her must realise, there's no creative barrier that can restrict an analogy, because it's just a hypothetical situation, not one restricted by realities, except those of the original situation it seeks to emulate.

what you are purporting here is a declaration of war, not against our military or gov't, but against civilians?

Thank you for making this clear, yes the creation of Israel and the mass illegal immigrations of Jews into Palestine were indeed a declaration of war, and their violence against unarmed Palestinian civilians was indeed a deplorable act.

It sounds like a direct attack on the civilian population, I wouldn't try that in texas, with or without the backing of the US military, which they would of course have

Yes, as was the invasion of Palestine by the Zionists, as the Palestinians at that time were unfortunately without a government or military to protect them, so they were fair game for the Zionist militias.

texans happen to own quite a few guns of their own. You just might end up with a fight on your hands.

Well the Palestinians weren't that heavily armed, as guns weren't as common back then, but over time they gradually became armed in order to put up the kind of resistance you so galliantly described would be met from the Texans. Again, thanks.

Again, you state that the muslims are coming en-mass and "asking" people to leave their home, not military, but regular civilians. You are not leaving an option for peace in this scenario.

Exactly, there's no option for peace in what the Zionists did when they took Palestine. Now you recognise this, you should translate it into your position on the Middle East conflict.

I would welcome anyone to live on my street, but tell me to get out of my home, I'd have to say no. Which seems peaceful to me, next move is yours.

again, very well put. The Palestinians welcomed Jews to live on their streets for 1200 years and both people got along fine. As Muslims and Americans do today in the US (most of the time). But once they mass immigrated illegally with the clearly announced plan of dispossessing the Palestinians of their homes and forcing them into the surrounding nations, the Palestinians understandably got upset.

So I take it, you now can understand why Palestinians welcomed Jews previously to live in their cities and towns (on their street so to speak) but once they wanted to expel them from their homes and form a new Jewish-based state, they kinda got a little distessed?

If you were to forcibly attack our citizens our military would respond, as well as our citizens.

In this analogy, the United States would no longer exist as an entity, did you not see my point about the Ottoman empire no longer existing as an entity to protect Palestine?

In this analogy, the USA would be divided into warring and weakened states (like the Muslim world was when Palestine was taken, the wolf attacks the lone sheep, not the flock under the watchful eye of the shepherd) and therefore would offer ljittle resistance. Perhaps a few of the surrounding and newly independant Former US states like Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Louisianna might engage in a few wars... but later us Muslims would just use this as propaganda, and say "See how war like these Americans are, 5 of their states instantly went to war with the tiny and newly created Muslim state of Nova Texas" (does this kind of propaganda sound familiar?).

We'd also use these wars as an excuse to occupy the little territories the last remaining Texans had been pushed into. We''d call them the "South Bank", a patch of land in the north of Texas, on the south bank of the Canadian River, and the "Pasadena Strip", a little strip of land on the east side of Texas, full of refugee camps.

What is hypocritical here? This is a poor comparison to the Isreal/ Palistine issue. We are not the people that were over run by the isrealis 50 years ago, even if you really want us to be, it is not a valid comparison.

As stated above, it's an analogy, it's a hypothetical situation designed to get your grey matter working.... Although that seems like a losing battle.

[Paranoia]

Make no mistakes, it's not veiled at all. this is an open and honest comparison.


The obvious reason why nobody's responding is that they'd either a) need to lie to themselves and pretend they'd do what they're asking others to do (ie. accept losing your home) or b) admit they're requests of the Palestinians are hypocritical, I think this is as clear as day.


No, there may be other reasons why nobody be responding.

You yourself are saying that this is a comparison between the Israel/Palestine conflict and yet these situations are not comparable.
So, you’re asking comment on something unrealistic.
It would be similar if you asked for an opinion on invisibility or time-travel, since those too are basing a “what if in real life” question on something that certainly can’t happen.

You cannot trap someone into admitting hypocrisy based on your comparison, even though that is it’s intent.


If we consider that 200 years prior to this taking of land by the zionists, the Ottomans were at the gates of Vienna... how do you know in 200 years time America may not be fragmented, her weaponry outdated and her political influence weakened and declined?
How do we know a strong China would not have desires on carving her up into easily digestable chunks? We don't know, but it's very much a possibility, and anyone who laughs at this analogy as completely impossible is simply drunk on their own nationalistic intoxicant.

Possibly they may also be drunk on actual economic knowledge.
It’s very doubtful that China will take over America at least soon.
If you’re asking us to comment on what may take place in 200 years, we’d have to take in all sorts of other unforeseen changes.
Asking for the opinion of people in the present day about an obviously extreme situation in the future, especially as a comparison, is naïve.

So a people whose land has been taken from them has a bit of a right to resist? They've got something legitimate to resist and it's not peculiar to them to meet invasion with violence?


This is a main problem with your logic.
You confuse “resistance” with terroristic violence.
Again, you’re comparing non-comparable situations, histories, people, etc, etc, etc, etc and expecting us to act the same as the Palestinians for this example. Can’t work.
What if the Palestinians had trillions of dollars like the other 49 states? What if they had the greatest arsenal of all mankind?
They don’t.



quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
it would take very little effort to overthrow these immigrants nowadays and soon all would be as it was. As if it didn't occur soon after. The other 49 states could easily overpower such a state and would.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


If the USA was divided into little statelets as the Muslim world was, and each was weakened and playedoff against another, and none possessed superior military firepower anymore, then no this would not affect my analogy in the way you predict.

If my grandmother had balls, she’d be my grandfather.
But she didn’t.

Aren’t you now changing the REST of the U.S. states to adapt to your analogy?



There's over 50 Muslim states today (suprisingly similar number), and none of them have prevented Israel from coming into existence in our land. Likewise I'm sure the "Hypothetically strong China" could arm this new Muslim state in Texas to the teeth and give her military superiority over her new neighbours, the fragmented former United States.

What is this alignment you keep speaking about with China?
The existing 50 Muslim states are much poorer than our 50 states.
They didn’t prevent Israel because they had infighting, lack of coordination and most of all…lack of money.



It would make about as much sense if I asked you what things would be like for the average Palestinian if they made $60,000 yr and had other creature comforts and freedoms. It's hard to imagine the "other side" when it's that far removed from your own reality.

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If Israel are the invaders you want to cite, they are also better armed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


But they weren't when they originally came. You need to have a little imagination here, I know you'd like to do anything you can tog et out of actually directly answering this, or participating in the poll, but I also know you've thought about this, and realise you'd be doing as they did.

If it's happened before, then it's quite possible it could happen again, and in your land too. although I'd think a more realistic invader would be some Mexican tribe that used to inhabit Texas hundreds of years ago or something. If that's what you need to think about to make the analogy more real, then so be it...



But if you ask us to have THAT much imagination, you’ve lost the original comparison and it’s results that you’re asking us to define.

Israel may not have had nukes when they originated, but they came with a power that you don’t recognize.
The power to peacefully change other’s thinking for your own good.
It worked for them and the US. It could work for others too, but they’re often too proud or too stubborn or too greedy.
I always think it’s amazing that people blame the US for being friends with Israel. They act as if Israel won the lottery and didn’t deserve it.


quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The people of the US would likely not be induced into acts like suicide bombings for example.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


The current sane population perhaps not, but then again neither did the original generation of Muslims who the invasion was imposed upon. But once you get generations of people who've grown up knowing NOTHING else but the occupation, it leads to an explosive mixture of oppression and resistance.



If you get generations of people who hate and hate more, then it stands to reason that they will also escalate their weapons when their attacks have so far not worked. You can teach a child anything and over time, it will desensetize them. Achieving greater and greater accomplishments than your predecessor and ancestors is a human trait. I have no doubt that the Palestines are perfecting suicide bombing. However, this is the problem.
When you perfect the art of suicide… you as a race, die.




That is why peace today is not possible, you can't force yourself into someones land, using violence and theft, and then all of a sudden say "violence is not the solution it's time for peace" It doesn't work that way sorry.



Yes, but the Palestines cannot hope to win militarily against Israel.
Israel has WAYYYY more power.
That’s the problem (once again):
Palestine is too stubborn to back down and will slowly kill themselves out of their own hate.
You just don’t continue attempting a course of action that doesn’t work. It’s just ridiculous and futile.



quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd say that America would be the most forgiving of any large empowered country, because we ARE a country of almost all immigrants ourselves and very tolerant of varied religions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Yes we all know how forgiving Americans are, as do the relatives of the 4000 Afghani civilians just murdered in Afghanistan in retaliation for an act which simply caused the destruction of one building and the loss of a few thousand lives. An act which was not even carried out by ANY of those Afghani families.

What we do in a foreign military operation now has nothing to do with our history of immigration.
You’re going to lose my respect if you don’t address the actual points of my post. Again (and again and again), you just can’t stop being bitter and looking towards the worst in people, can you?

My statement and your statement are not exclusive.
One does not negate the other.
Unfortunately, it looks like you ran out of comments regarding this very hard to dispute statement of mine and instead lashed out with an unrelated horror.


The occupation of Texas would mean losing a lot more buildings, more casualties and something much worse than a foriegn attack on your soil, but a foriegn theft of your soil.



So???? You’re talking fantasy, why bother addressing your “agenda” here now?


quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You'd get your butt kicked right off the face of our land.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Arabs had the EXACT same mentality to begin with.




The Arabs are not the US. Not our land, not our economy, not our people, not our technology, not our diverse religions, not our armed forces, not ANYTHING like us except men. Dumb comparison. Boo!


quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are we now the pompous Americans you hoped to see? Probably.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Nope, in fact yourself, and the person who posted directly after you (who I'm about to address next) have just shown me what I suspected all along. Americans are just average people like anyone else. They would defend their land from invasion, they'd stand strong and fight against an unjust invader like any other human being on this planet.

The only difference I see between Americans and "my camp" is they unfrotunately can't accept others doing it. and this I find to be a little sad and disturbing.



Well, you need not have “suspected” anything.
It’s well known that we have the greatest defense against foreign invaders, especially the kind that are missiles.
You knew this.


…and once again (ad nauseum), it’s no wonder that “the only difference I see between Americans and ‘my camp’ is they unfrotunately can't accept others doing it” is how you consider this, because you have not used comparable examples.
You achieved exactly the results you set out to because you ignored any points we brought up that would counter the situation in the first place.

Why not just ask a WAYYYY simpler question:

Americans…how would you feel if you were in Palestine and Israel invaded you?

Wouldn’t that be easier than hypothetical situations stretched beyond comprehension and the need for imagination?



If anyhitng America has been the single greatest fanner of these flames. America has unashamedly armed the Israeli's to the teeth and supported and protected her from more U.N resolutions than I care to mention. All this time she falsely claims to the world she is the "Independant peacebroker, trying, in all her altruistic benevolence, to find a just and lasting soluition to the Middle East crisis". You and I both know in our hearts this is nothing but the epitomy of hypocrisy, so please don't ask for respect, EARN IT.



Has it ever occurred to you that we might have sold other Middle Eastern nations arms also, if they appeared to be stable and humanistic in their thinking?

The Arabs and Muslims have long been at war and angry with almost all border populaces.
The last thing we need on our hands are unreasonable, egotistic, “never wrong ourselves” races with high tech weapons and weapons of mass destruction. You’re mad that we have made such deals, but not so much because it was with the Israelites, but moreso because it wasn’t with everyone else that are their enemies. Half the world wouldn’t still be here if we did.

And with that said, why are no other nuclear capable countries selling nukes to Israels enemies? Why not China? Or Pakistan?
Or India? It isn’t just money that is the question.

[Malcom]

To make your hypothetical more realistic you would have to add: Mexico declairs war on USA, Texas sides with Mexico (they loose)

[khilafah]

Malcolm how that fits into the equation I really can't work it out.

The only war I can think of (besides the ones I already mentioned in my last post) is WWI, in which case, we could say Argentina declares war on China, USA supports her, Argentina loses, and so too does USA, therefore China has pretext for carving USA up into inidividual states.

[ive said a bad]

Bottom line is Khil, weaker nations get conquered by stronger ones, although it is happening less as we modernize. Right or wrong, it happened, the only end to it is when the fighting stops and the talking starts.

A quick note, before the "white man" set foot in N. America, Indian tribes often fought, conquered, and enslaved other tribes, and think, these were all americans right? I think the analogy of the infighting and self destruction applies much better to the overtaking of N. America in the 16-1800's. So even though my ancestors "took" the land from the Indians, in a long "war", the local indian people do not strap dynomite to their chests and blow up my office. We have made peace and live with natives, as must be done in isreal and palestine.

[seeker]

I'll keep this quick because this is about the silliest attempt at an analogy that I've ever seen. No the jews did not invade palestine. Rather the land was under the control of the British empire, and they divided up the land before they ceeded control of the land. As for the new borders, well, thats what happens durring war, land changes hands. Oh, and no, it wasn't Israel that started that war, was it? So, yeah, your analogy basically ignores all of the history of war, and terrorism in the region, doesn't it. Sorry but you analogy isn't even close to being an "open and honest comparison.", try again...

And hypothetically speaking, what I would do, is buy a new house. Yeah people do it here all the time. You don't like the way the neighborhood is heading, you don't bomb innocent poeple that practice the same religion as your new neighbors do, but you move.

[khilafah]

Bottom line is Khil, weaker nations get conquered by stronger ones

This is called "Law of the Jungle", if you subscribe to this kind of view, then you accept suicide bombings and all the resistance of the Palestinians. They're just trying to become the strogner nation and conquer back what's theres...

No problem, live by the sword die by the sword.

[northwoods_gal]

My answer wasn't one of those listed. So here's mine:

Make room and be friendly. Make new friends. Live and let live.

[khilafah]

So you'd let 60% of your country just be taken over and made into a new country? And if you happened to own a family home in that 60% of the conutry (which your family had owned for 1200 years), and it wa syour farm, so it produced your entire livlihood, you'd worked your entire life on this farm, supporting your family...

You're telling me you'd just pick up and move, in the name of making new friends? "friends" who'd been writing books for years, declaring their intentions to drive you into the surrounding nations and to destroy your country?

Yes I'm sure that's how you'd react.

Still I am disappointed that the Hypocritical supporters of Israel are nable to put themselves in the situation of the Palestinians (yes an imaginary analogy takes a bit of thought, I udnerstand, but I think it's your lack of willingness to expose your hypocrisy which is the obstacle, not the lack of intelligence in imagining the analogy).

But we both know that if you answer you'll need to add some credibility to path taken by the Palesatinians, and knowing that most of you at least recognise this in yourselves, makes me feel like I achieved something in this thread.

[northwoods_gal]

Look, friend, I don't support Israel wholeheartedly. Please don't make assumptions about people that you don't really know, okay?

When the Hmong came to WI, there were some people biased against them and some that were ready to help them out. Like everywhere, people were divided concerning their response. In that situation, live and let live was the best response.

Concerning Israel, it disregarded what the UN said should take place concerning land for the Jews and for the Palestinians. It should have listened to the UN and it should have remembered what it was like having no homeland and having no justice.

In forgetting that, I believe it lost its national soul. During the Holocaust, it was the victim. Now it has become the victimizer. That is wrong.

Terrorism on both sides is wrong. I've often thought that UN peacekeepers need to come in and make sure both sides establish homelands for themselves and then have orderly trade between themselves. That is, workers from one side allowed to go to the other side, etc.

It will be extremely difficult to rebuild the West Bank, if not impossible. For I don't think that the US and Israel will be all-fired anxious for that to happen. But it must. They must remember Germany and Japan after WWII. Only prosperous countries can have any chance of peace. I am not saying, btw, that Palestine is fascist.

Hope this helps explain my point of view.

[khilafah]

gal,

Look, friend, I don't support Israel wholeheartedly. Please don't make assumptions about people that you don't really know, okay?

When I spoke to the hypocritical supporters of Israel, that was not directed at you, sorry.

It was directed at those people who have posted in this thread, but refused to participate in the poll, knowing full well they'd have to support the Palestinian path.

I apologise for not making this clear enoguh.

When the Hmong came to WI, there were some people biased against them and some that were ready to help them out.

did the Hmong comes as refugees just wanting to live in WI (not sure what WI is?) or did they come as militias and terrorists, trying to build a new state in WI? The Zionists came to Palestine, with the clear intention of destryoing the Arab people there, and making a Jewish people there instead.

To give a bit of a picture on what occurred. In the late 1800's, the Jews in Palestine were no more than 2% of the population (I think Muslims in America are more than this today). In the late 1800's some Jewish "thinkers" in Europe, before Hitler was even out of day school, began writing books, declaring their desire to remove the native Palestinians into the surrounding areas (ie. what is now Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt) and to form a Jewish state in the land that belonged to the Palestinians, and which Jews were a 2% minority. They began mass waves of illegal immigration into Palestine, in order to make their population bigger, so they could get sympathy from the world, and validity for their desire to make it a Jewish state. The Arabs resisted this mass immigration, which at one stage led to the Jewish population increasing by 300% within a few years, and it steadily grew often at over 100% every coupla years after that. SO naturally the Arabs got a little upset, and began riots to stop this mass immigration, which by now, they'd reasd the Jewish books from Europe and knew they what their plans for the Palestinians were. The Jews formed militias and began attackign the Arab villages, and blowing up buildings (like the King David Hotel in Jeruslaem). In the 1940's the British, who'd been overseeing all this, handed it over to the UN. The UN drew upa plan to give 60% of the land to the Jews, who were only about 35% of the population by this time (due to their massive illegal immigrations). Naturally the Arabs rejected such an idea, but the Jews declared a state anyway, which naturally caused a war.. and the restis history.

Muslims had no problem with Jewish refugees seeking refuge in our lands. After the Spanish Inquisitition, in which thousands of Jews were persecuted and murdered, the Islamic lands took in so many Jews, that the capital of the Islamic world (Istanbul) became 1/3 full of Jews, and till this day still houses many Jews from this time. We had no problem with this. But when they decided to mass immigrate and try to form a state, forming militias and blowing up buildings and terrorising villages, that's when we sortof drew the line, and decided this is war, nor friendship.

Can you see why? would you react differently if a group began immigrating illegally into your conutry to set up a new country and push you into a surrounding land? if they began bobming your buildings and terrorising your villages and towns? Would you take such people as friends?

Terrorism on both sides is wrong. I've often thought that UN peacekeepers need to come in and make sure both sides establish homelands for themselves and then have orderly trade between themselves.

No Palestinians immigrated to America, Russia and Europe and began terrorising Jews, they came to our land, entered our villages with guns and terrorised us. As for the UN solving the problem, that's a joke, the UN was one of the largest causes of this problem.

[northwoods_gal]

concerning the UN, that explains why they haven't solved the problem yet.

As for your asking me if I would support a people who forceably tried to take over my land and made me the minority, I think the US proved that when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and when the Brits fought us in the War of 1812.

WI is the American State in which I live. If you look at a US map and find Lake Superior in the middle, at the top, you'll be in Wisconsin (WI). It's shaped like a mitten. During the Vietnam War, the Hmong people fought for the US and then after the US lost, they lost their homeland. The Hmong were welcomed to come over to the US and many settled in Wisconsin, among other states. They came over here not knowing modern ways. After a settling down and some getting used to the idea, the Hmong are, of course, productive members of society.

During WWII, there was a land called Pommern (now Northern Poland) which was held by Germanic Peoples. Towards the end of the war, Roosevelt and Stalin and Churchill carved up Europe and gave the USSR the Eastern part of Europe, including Pommern. The inhabitants were given 10 minutes to leave and not allowed any records. Many tearful stories have been handed down. Anyone found carrying records was shot. Polish peoples from E. Poland were forceably removed from THEIR homes and forced to live in Pommmern. That was 57 years ago. It's hard when you lose your homeland. They never got theirs back and they vowed never to use violent means to try to get it back. When Germany was reunited in '89, Chancellor Kohl was made to promise never to try and get Pommern back.

Sometimes, no matter how just the cause, some people can never get their whole, original homelands back. That doesn't mean that the world shouldn't try for the Palestinians. They need and deserve a homeland. But sometimes it doesn't happen.

Hope it happens this time.

[khilafah]

I thought you might have meant Wisconsin.. but not being an American meant I could not be sure. You should realise not all people are Americans and they are not aware of the context you're spekaing in.

For instance if I told you many Jews lived in Vic, would you know what I was talking about? Or that most of our Arabs are in NSW?

As for your story of Pommern, that's sad, what's sadder is the people didn't fight to keep it. This tells me that maybe Pommern wasn't as strong a people as you're claiming they were.

Take for instance the Chechyan people, who were completely removed from their land also by the Russians. They were completely relocated, yet they came back and reformed their conutry. Likewise the Palestinian people (who are largely also Muslims like the Chechyans) will reform their country, they will not give it up without a fight. And if they are completely defeated, then another BILLION Muslims exist on this planet to continue the fight.

The people of Pommern may not have been part of a civilisation like Islamic civilisation, so when they're deported, nobody is left to fight, for us, we will fight for eternity, and wiping out 1/5 of the worlds population is going to be no easy task.

This is our land, and we will not give it up, the Jews, and their supporters need to realise this. The longer they cling onto this dream of a Zionist state, the longer they lengthen the war.

[northwoods_gal]

"I thought you might have meant Wisconsin.. but not being an American meant I could not be sure. You should realise not all people are Americans and they are not aware of the context you're spekaing in." Excuuuse, me.

"As for your story of Pommern, that's sad, what's sadder is the people didn't fight to keep it. This tells me that maybe Pommern wasn't as strong a people as you're claiming they were. " Man, you just don't understand, do you?

There's just no way I can explain it to you then. You have so much darkness in your soul. YOu can't understand...You take a people's wanting to let themselves be extinguished as a people for strength. Misery for generations for wisdom. The willingness to break God's eternal commandment concerning individuals murdering individuals as nobleness.

You would expect a small group of people to fight a mighty army with overwhelming numbers and with no ally for themselves to risk being wiped from the face of the earth for the sake of momentary pride! And you, safe in your house, would judge them! Excuuse me!

Strength is going to a land of freedom and living a peaceful life and raising your children in peaceful lives.

Your way is asinine.

[northwoods_gal]

"Take for instance the Chechyan people, who were completely removed from their land also by the Russians. They were completely relocated, yet they came back and reformed their conutry. Likewise the Palestinian people (who are largely also Muslims like the Chechyans) will reform their country, they will not give it up without a fight. And if they are completely defeated, then another BILLION Muslims exist on this planet to continue the fight.

The people of Pommern may not have been part of a civilisation like Islamic civilisation, so when they're deported, nobody is left to fight, for us, we will fight for eternity, and wiping out 1/5 of the worlds population is going to be no easy task.

This is our land, and we will not give it up, the Jews, and their supporters need to realise this. The longer they cling onto this dream of a Zionist state, the longer they lengthen the war."

With so much hatred in you, you have already lost.

Palestinians and Jews can live together. Peace--in case, you've never heard the word, it means an abundant life without murder, pain, and bloodshed.

You will fight for eternity? Why do you hate your children so much? And besides, you don't know what tomorrow will bring--only God knows.

Maybe I was wrong about what people have been saying, but of course, you are just one person. I'm not sure you are Palestininan, but I know you are unhappy.

Take time to smell the flowers, make someone else smile. do something for someone else today. Life can be good! God's solution to this problem isn't yours. He isn't pleased with people who intend to murder others for eternity

[khilafah]

Your kind of deluded thinking is not based in reality.

Even if you call for peace, the ravaging hordes will come. They came to the defenceless Muslims of Bosnia, they come to the defenceless Muslims of India and Kashmir daily, they come to the Palestinians and they come to many other peoples aronud the world, Muslim and non-Muslim.

The person who calls to reject readiness and a resolve to defend yoursel and your family and your home, is the assistant of the hordes, not the heralder of peace as they claim.

I am not Palestinian (if such a thing exists) but then again neither was Salahudeen Ayyubi, or Shaykh Izzedin al-Qassam, does that mean they didn't feel a strong affinity with the holy land? No. They did, and they liberated it from the non-Muslims. I hope one day to be part of doing the same, by the will of the one in whose hands rests all our souls.

[ive said a bad]

Originally posted by khilafah


This is called "Law of the Jungle", if you subscribe to this kind of view, then you accept suicide bombings and all the resistance of the Palestinians. They're just trying to become the strogner nation and conquer back what's theres...

No problem, live by the sword die by the sword.

PLEASE, quote the quote, not just what you want to out of it, read again.

Bottom line is Khil, weaker nations get conquered by stronger ones, although it is happening less as we modernize. Right or wrong, it happened, the only end to it is when the fighting stops and the talking starts.

A quick note, before the "white man" set foot in N. America, Indian tribes often fought, conquered, and enslaved other tribes, and think, these were all americans right? I think the analogy of the infighting and self destruction applies much better to the overtaking of N. America in the 16-1800's. So even though my ancestors "took" the land from the Indians, in a long "war", the local indian people do not strap dynomite to their chests and blow up my office. We have made peace and live with natives, as must be done in isreal and palestine.

Can you read the part where it says local indian people do not strap dynomite to their chests and blow up my office. That would be a terrorist act.

The ONLY way your people will ever live in peace is if they make some effort to do so. Blowing up malls by strapping explosives to your children, will ultimately be your demise, to quote you, live by the sword and die by the sword.

They are TRYING to become the stronger nation, they are not, nor will they be anytime soon. There only hope for survival as a people is to learn to live with the failures of the past and deal with today, else the future is mighty bleak.

[northwoods_gal]

You are amusing! Peace is delusional thinking?? hahahahaha! The USA is a mix of groups that some people claim could never live together peacefully. East Indians, Europeans, African-Americans, Asians, etc. There was a time that the Irish were very much looked down upon. I'm German, Irish, Scottish and English. At one time, the English and Scots were mortal enemies. Ever here of Tiger Woods, he is multi-racial. Of many people who have many racial lines in their blood.

People can and do live in peace. In Pommern, in the city of Bromberg (can't spell the Polish name), Poles and Germans lived together in peace. The man who told me this admitted that many would not believe him. One thought, how could two mortal enemies ever live together in peace. Side by side.

In Jerusalem itself, Muslims, Jews,and Christians lived in peace together for many, many years.

I wish I knew if most Muslims think like you, with such hatred. Any religon that proposes such undying hatred is not the religon that saves people, but that destroys people. The Devil seeks to destroy people, not God.

But that is for the comparitive religons forum.

It's sad, that people like you have such darkness in your soul. I'll pray for you that you see the light in Jesus Christ, who brings real peace.

[khilafah]

Of many people who have many racial lines in their blood.

I myself have multi-racial bloodlines, as do most Muslims, our civilisation is the only one to ever have achieved true multi-culturalism. Where a black, white and yellow man, become true brothers.

The Western multi-culturalism is false, and it's often stricken with discrimination and violence.

In Jerusalem itself, Muslims, Jews,and Christians lived in peace together for many, many years.

Precisely under ISLAMIC civilisation, we all lived together peacefully pretty much (except the crusades and other minor events) for the good part of 1200 years. We welcomed the Jews into our lands, and shared our home with them, look how they repay us? As soon as our empire became weak, they began mass immigrating, forming militias, blowing up our buildigns and driving us out of our villages, until today we have this "Israel" covering most of our land in Palestine. Such treachery can only be met with treachery.

I wish I knew if most Muslims think like you, with such hatred.

A wish to see wrongs righted is hatred? You are either a) Completely ignorant of the situation, or b) A supporter of the tyranny and oppression occuring against my people, so which one is it? Ignorant or tyrannical?

I'll pray for you that you see the light in Jesus Christ, who brings real peace.

How about you stop praying to humans and begin praying to your Maker.

I myself was once stricken with the polytheism of Christianity, but due to the guidance of my Lord, I found Islam, alhamdulilah (praise and thanks to him alone).

[northwoods_gal]

"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wish I knew if most Muslims think like you, with such hatred.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A wish to see wrongs righted is hatred? You are either a) Completely ignorant of the situation, or b) A supporter of the tyranny and oppression occuring against my people, so which one is it? Ignorant or tyrannical? "

I'm not sure how to answer this one. Look at the comparative religons forum under" Why do christians need Jesus (PBUH)? bintmasood answered that question for me.

Just as a person who grew up never seeing snow would have a difficult time understanding what snow is, so I have a difficult time understanding such violent emotion. But Bintmasood gave me an answer I can begin to understand.

"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll pray for you that you see the light in Jesus Christ, who brings real peace.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



How about you stop praying to humans and begin praying to your Maker.

I myself was once stricken with the polytheism of Christianity, but due to the guidance of my Lord, I found Islam, alhamdulilah (praise and thanks to him alone"

I think this may be more suitable in the comparitive religons forum.

Peace.

[hen]

Khilafah,

In my city in the last several years 20,000 Somalian Muslim immigrants have arrived. For the most part they have blended in. By that I mean they have opened stores, formed community groups, formed social groups, started a mosque, etc etc. They have been welcomed. NOn-muslim groups have helped them to adjust to life in America too. So in a way we have had a mass immigration of Muslims to my city.

AS to your comparison Khilafah, I think you have some good points but I think you also simplified some issues too. What the Israeli settlers are doing as far as stealing land from Pals is obviously wrong. There can be no justification for that and it must stop.

I think it should be noted however that there has always been a Jewish presence in that land. If you read the Hebrew Scriptures/Christian Old Testament you will see the conquest of the land of Canaan - Israel. You will also read about several diasporas and regatherings into the land. So this has been going on for thousands of years. As you are well aware the Jews use various passages to justify their existance there. Unfortunately they also use it to justify stealing land from Arabs.

ONe last thing, Christianity believes in only ONE GOD (the ONE and ONLY). Please do not denigrate Jesus' followers by claiming they are polytheists.

Respectfully,
Hen

[northwoods_gal]

Originally posted by Hen
Khilafah,

ONe last thing, Christianity believes in only ONE GOD (the ONE and ONLY). Please do not denigrate Jesus' followers by claiming they are polytheists.

Respectfully,
Hen

I don't think he's trying to denigrate Christians, because according to Islamic beliefs, we are polytheists.

I'll put it this way:

Jesus said, I and the Father are one. And yet, according to the Bible, only Jesus died on the cross. Now how can God be indivisible and yet be separated on the cross. Does God have split personalities?

How can the Spirit of God come upon God as happened when Jesus was baptized?

How can Jesus talk to Himself and try to presuade Himself to not compell Him to go to the cross?

When Jesus said, My Father, He was talking to Himself.

These illustrations, I hope, show you the problems that Islam has with the concept of three-in-one (as Christianity explains it).

in other words, Muslims aren't putting you down, they're just seeing it from a different angle than you do.

[hen]

Northwoods Gal,

I understand how Muslims view the concept of the Trinity and I understand the difference in how Muslims view Jesus. I also know Khilafah was not out to offend me but I wanted to make the point that Christians worship ONE GOD only. Just as it is sin to Muslims to join any partners to Allah, it is equally sin to Christians to say that we worship more than one God.

Hen

[FatMike]

[stop making stupid remarks that has gotta be one of the most stupidest thing ive ever heard in my life and im not gonna let u paste trash on this forum especially from that Terrorist Nazi supporting website]

[FatMike]

Ya, freedom of speech is all good as long has your agenda in it. This forum is a peice of crap if people can not express different views.

Oh and one more thing. What part of that post was a lie. You can not change the truth no matter how hard you wish.

[khilafah]

Hen,

So in a way we have had a mass immigration of Muslims to my city.

Sure no problem, we let them immigrate, our cities became full of Jewish refugees after the Reconquista (remember when Christians slaughtered heaps of Muslims, Jews and even Christians?). No problem letting them immigrate.

How about (just to make the situation correct) if these Somalis wanted to form a new state in your city? and they began writing books declaring their intention to "push the natives into surrounding areas"? Would you still gree them as well and offer them assistance in settling? The problem isn't mass illegal immigration, it's when that mass illegal immigration is aimed at dispossessing the present inhabitants.

I think it should be noted however that there has always been a Jewish presence in that land.

Well, there has been about a 3000 year history of Jews in that land. Out of that 3000 years, 1830 of them, Jews were no more than about 1-2% of the population, they were a negligable minority, who were barely even recognised. Late 1800's census' from the Uthmani (Ottoman) government of the land, show that jews were no more than 2%. In the late 600's when Muslims took over administration of the region, part of the contract of Christians handing over the land stated Jews must not be allowed to live there. So for 1200 years of Islamic rule, and probably the 600 years of Christian/Roman rule before that, there was no real Jewish presence in the land.

Now some other interesting historical facts about the region, apart from the Biblical ones, which yes are important, but which mean very little today, as they occured over 2000 years ago:

FACT: The Dome of the rock has stood in al-Quds (Jerusalem) for longer than both Jewish Temples combined.

FACT: The Muslims ruled Spain for longer than both Jewish Kingdoms combined.

[Theresa]

We did have a war with Mexico over parts of Texas.
Now we live on the same continent in peace. They have their own country and we have ours. They come over here to get better paying jobs, education, to name a few things and we help them out.

[hen]

Khilafah,
I just saw the response to my post. Sorry about the late response on my part.

Your analogy of the Somalian immigrants to my area is a good one. What would I do or think if they claimed the right to my homeland? I would fight it. Politically at first. If that didnt work and they began armed fighting I would fight back to defend my family and my land. But there is a big difference . The Somalians just arrived. They have not always had a presence here. We dont have a 2000 year old or more co-sharing of the land with them as the Pals and the Jews do. My home state is not home to 3 major world religions. We havent been bickering over the land for years and years. So on one level I see your point and agree with you on another level I dont.

Hen

[pooya]

if the mass immigration of muslims agreed to accept the american way of life, lived in peace, and accepted the constitution of the united states(which states that religion and state are seperate) then i would not mind.

[pooya]

and a follow up to my previous post, i think many are too obsessed with the issue of land. to me , freedom is more important than who "owns" the country. perhaps it is just the american libertarian in me, but i could care less who controls the government.

the truth is that arab-israelis who have accepted israeli citizenship have more freedom than arabs in most arab controlled countries. if palestinians actually accepted being part of israel, they'd be such a large voting bloc that Jwish politicians would woo them so much, they'd be treated like royalty.

[Janet]

My second time to post here.
I've been reading the post for weeks and am, for the most part, impressed with the thoughful post.
It seems every other board dealing with the subject on all of our minds these days, is so full of hate and mud slinging that it turns my stomach.

I wanted to comment on the poll. Of couse I cannot pick any of the selections, as none fit my point of view.

First it wants me to accept that the Jews are the invaders and occupiers, and I don't take that view.
Second it wants me to take the view that if a country is occupied, all methods of resistance is acceptable. I can't accept that view either.
We do have in history a true occupation to draw from. Europe in WWII.
The Germans overran and occupied most of Europe, there were resistant groups in every country.
Their cause was just, no one (I think) would dispute that. But would a just cause justify everything?
I will give some examples, some happened, and some, as far as I know, never did.
Rate in your mind the following as honorable and just, or dishonorable and unjust.
Would it be just and honorable to:
1) Burn down a building housing records, making it possible for some of those wanted to disappear?
2)Burst into a barracks of sleeping German soldiers and kill them as they slept?
3)Make false ID's and fake food coupons for those in hiding.
4)Cut phone lines.
5)Invade a German officers home and kill his entire family
6)Gather information and give it to the opposing armies.
7)Go into a cafe where off duty German soldiers, and other civilians were dining and set off a bomb?

My point is that if Americans seem to give more support to Israel than Palastiians it is for the above reasons.
I, and I belive most Americans, heart bleeds for the plight of the Palastinians, and I want a way for true peace and justice to be found for them.
But if it means pretending that suicide bombings are just, or that Arafat wants peace than I just can't do it.

[Peter J. Malloy]

I fall under none of these in the poll.

I live in a diverse neighborhood already. I joined the group to learn more about the Islamic point of view.

All Americans are not hateful.

I don't think it's fair to lump us all together.

Peter

[Bilal]

Good point

Originally posted by kaphirgoyim
Did they come peacefully?

[Raven]

Originally posted by khilafah
Ok,



So far you've done exactly the same as the Palestinians did, they called on the Arab governments aronud them to solve the issue. That failed.. and the land was taken by the invaders, what now? Now make your choice.

If you want to make this more correct to the historical event, imagine the USA is fragmented into small and weak states (like the Islamic [ottoman] empire was at the time of this invasion) and that a large and hostile superpower (such as China) is overseeing the immigration of these Muslims and the plans to draw up an Islamic state in your state...

so now how do you vote?

Khilafah,
Can I ask what the point of the poll was? If you're trying to get other people to accept people blowing themselves up in civilians areas, good luck.

[Peter J. Malloy]

Originally posted by northwoods_gal
My answer wasn't one of those listed. So here's mine:

Make room and be friendly. Make new friends. Live and let live.



YEP..........

We ae not all bad people. Get to know us -- you might like some of us.

P

(my R is sticking again)

[derf]

???

[hagar]

There is no way to answer this poll, I was just drifting through these polls and answering and this is the ONE that had not even one answer close enough to my opinion that I could answer........hmmmm could it be a bit slanted by the person who asked the question....I think yes.

What I would do....move over and make space...the world is a BIG place and since you are talking about Israel...in such a SMALL parcel of land, certainly there is room in the world for all of us!!!

[AbuMubarak]

i would welcome them with open arms and say, as salaamu alaykum, wa rahmatullahi, wa barakaatuhu, what took you so long?

[THHuxley]

I couldn't vote, because you did not provide an answer I could agree with.

I would wlcome them just as my grandparents were welcomed when they were part of a mass migration here in the 1920s.