|
|
Originally posted by alphawolf at 28-5-2006 08:27 AM
Re: Jews claiming the Mid East is their homeland. This goes back looooooong time. According to them, after persecution by the Pharoah, leading them to Exodus to the area we know know as Mid East, they claimed that God give that area as the 'Promised Land' for them to build their nation. Indeed they managed to build a strong nation (remember the stories of Nabi Daud and hi son, Nabi Sulaiman?) Their failure to maintain the foundation lead to their downfall and become virtually nomads as their homeland were conquered and administered by various other nations.
This however does not make their claims valid...otherwise the Red Indians can claim sovereignty over the whole of North America, ditto the Aborigines of Australia.
(I intentionally left out the religious aspects of the Jew...things like they hace been cursed to eternity.....)
Aha, but when you go to that land, most ancient artifacts of that area relates to their history and culture. There is no such thing as "Palestinian" artifacts...infact there is no such thing as a "Palestinian" language too. Can you say that they did not originate from that arae?
Infact, history of the Jews in mideast is not only found in today's Israel.
I personally saw with my own two eyes, of Jewish reliefs....in ROME! of all place. The relief was of Roman soldiers from the mideast campaign carrying Jewish religious artifacts in their truimphant march in Rome.
Well, their claim is not just according to their books. It is in your book too. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by ef/x at 26-5-2006 04:57 PM
I totally, agreed... but let me remind u that in islam we have a concept of 'muslim brotherhood'
I suppose the concept of brotherhood goes to far when you say that covers those who did wrong.
I would think that a divine command would only meant that you stand with your brothers if they are right.
Yesterday, Indonesia had another tragedy, M'sia did the right thing and offered help (botherhood concept), so did many other nations like Japan, China, Australia, USA etc.
Now, how come the 20+ rich Arab nations, with their coffers overflowing with oil money (now $70/barrel) is not fast in offering any help ? Where is the brotherhood here ?
So, why grab land that not belong to them & create ISRAEL ? Cth: aku berketurunan jawa... adakah sepatutnya aku balik ke indon dan pergi ke Tanah Jawa & CLAIM NIE TANAH NENEK MOYANG AKU ? Unless my claim is valid if I had a proper documents exp spt geran tanah dsb...
There is a UN declaration on the creation of Israel. And also in the holy book of 3 religions.
Lawrence of Arabia is a British agent ! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.E._Lawrence & Faizal is just a PAWN utk memecah belahkan umat Islam & menghancurkan Empayer Ottoman...
Do you see how the Brits play with politics ? Who got the most benefits ?
Yes, he was. In the Ottoman empire, the Arabs were no independent too, they wanted their own country (Arab nationalism). Post WW2, there are now 20+ Arab countries. So actually, the Arab did benefit and Faizal did become King of Syria and Iraq.
The independence of Arab states did not take place imediately but it did take place.
Whoe benefit most ? The Arabs.
The land demarcated for Israel is just a small strip of land.
According to the agreement with Faizal, all muslim sites are to be administered by muslims. This the Jews and complied, that is why the Al-Aqsa Mosque is still administered by Muslims and the Israel gomen had enforced it in their laws and prevented any jews from visiting it (incase, some mad religuous nutcase blows it up.)
So they kept their end of the deal, will the Arab keep theirs ?
[ Last edited by gekko at 29-5-2006 10:51 AM ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It does't mean that the Iranians support Hitler's ideology ! (refering to Aryan race supremercy) Do you know semenanjung once called 'Tanah Melayu' before pembentukan Malaysia
Actually, it does.
and I quote from this Iranian site:
The naming conventions for Persia (aka Iran) changed in 1935. The suggestion for the name change from Persia to Iran is said to have come from the Persian ambassador to Germany, who was a Nazi sympathizer. In 1935 Germany was ruled by Hitler. Aryanism was equated by the Nazis as the highest level of human civilization, in an article of faith based on a vulgar Hegelian hyperbola. Apparently the Persian ambassador was persuaded by his Nazi friends that Persia would be better off as an ally of Nazi Germany.
http://www.payvand.com/news/04/dec/1153.html
It is actually a disadvantage to rename the country. Today there are political forces to change the name of the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Gulf (more Arab nationalism).
[ Last edited by gekko at 29-5-2006 10:48 AM ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by mmc at 26-5-2006 11:46 AM
guess its a case of percentages gek... i equate the israelis the modern equavalent of nazis, so that does not make me a hitler lover...but simple minds may equate hitler the jewish killer as a saviour without knowing or denying the whole story...like the bosnians, i'm sure if hitler had won, they would be next on the list, but at least they belatedly realised that and joined the partisans...
but to put the blame of these simple minded thoughts onto a silent majority of moslems is not fair gekko methinks..
Point noted.
The part that I was questioning was that even after eveything is know about Hitler and his geng, there are people (who want to gain world sympathy) but yet align themselves with dark forces like Nazism.
We are not talking about events 50, 60 or 70 years ago....where you could say that they were ignorant.
This is happening today like the pic of that protester in Pakistan.
As for the Palestinian, well they seem to align with any bad guys that is known.....Hitler/Nazi, Saddam Hussein (when he invaded Kuwait, no wonder the Kuwaitis kick them out later), the Soviet Union etc.
At that rate their are going, perhaps that is why their predicament have not improved whereas their nemesis keeps growing from strength to strength.
It doesn't take much to see who are the cursed ones.
[ Last edited by gekko at 29-5-2006 11:07 AM ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by gekko at 29-5-2006 10:42 AM
I suppose the concept of brotherhood goes to far when you say that covers those who did wrong.
I would think that a divine command would only meant that you stand with your brothers if they are right.
Seriously bro..., I think u need a new pair of 'spek', I did incl below hadith in my previous posting (if u care to check) :lebai:
Narrated Anas:
Allah's Apostle said, "Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one. People asked, "O Allah's Apostle! It is all right to help him if he is oppressed, but how should we help him if he is an oppressor?" The Prophet said, "By preventing him from oppressing others."
Al Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 43, Number 624:
Now, how come the 20+ rich Arab nations, with their coffers overflowing with oil money (now $70/barrel) is not fast in offering any help ? Where is the brotherhood here ?
Let me give an example during the Aceh tsunamis, the Arabs & muslim world did donate... but it was not reported in Western Media same as in Katrina... did u find many Malaysian pics & news in Timor laste lately ?
There is a UN declaration on the creation of Israel. And also in the holy book of 3 religions.
Funny.... since when the Israelies comply with UN resolutions.....
O.k put it this way, try IMAGINE u are a palestinian who live happily in your home, suddenly a guy came to your house & demand u to hand over your house & land to him based on the reasons what you have just present - what would you do ? Are u going to comply peacefully ?
Banyak jugak org yahudi tinggal di negara2 islam yg lain tampa perlu rasa takut atau berlaku keganasan...
The land demarcated for Israel is just a small strip of land.
According to the agreement with Faizal,..
Alamak bro... again u failed to read my previous post carefully laaa.... & also plz check the provided link ler
The Faisal-Weizmann agreement survived only a few months. The outcome of the peace conference itself did not provide the vast Arab state that Faisal desired mainly because the British and French had struck their own secret Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 dividing the Middle East between their own spheres of influence, and soon Faisal began to express doubts about cooperation with the Zionist movement. Within a year he was calling on Britain to grant the Arabs of Palestine their political rights as part of his Syrian Kingdom.
I agreed ! The fall of Ottoman Empire did benefit the Arab but the brits & french gained the most ! The greatest loser is muslims !! We lost potential muslim super power & resulting Kamal Artartuk in Turkey & Wahabbism dynasty in today Saudi Arabia:hmm:
[ Last edited by ef/x at 29-5-2006 04:12 PM ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously bro..., I think u need a new pair of 'spek', I did incl below hadith in my previous posting (if u care to check)
I believe you refer to yourself ?
So why "defend" the Mufti who was guilty of racialism and atrocities.....see the new article that started this thread. Written by who ?
Is that in accordance to the hadith you provided ?
Another example (this is actually off-topic)....you know Azahari Husin ? The guy who died in Indon called a terrorist ?
Well, you did not see the video clip in RTM, but in Channelnewsasia, they show the videoclip of his funeral in Malacca, there was a huge turnout at his funeral. And all the men surrounding his grave were chanting the arabic equivalent of God is Great.
So what was my point ? Most people only follow the hadith on the brotherhood part (regardless is the brother concern did righyt or wrong). Just like the writer of the newspaper article, just becoz the Mufti is muslim, therefore Hitler can't e that bad. Read again the article.
Sure the hadith looks good, but are the followers faithful to it....or just faithful to the brotherhood concept and every Muslim must be right and supported eventhough we all know its wrong.
Let me give an example during the Aceh tsunamis, the Arabs & muslim world did donate... but it was not reported in Western Media same as in Katrina... did u find many Malaysian pics & news in Timor laste lately ?
I believe they only acted after much critism. So have any M'sia news report stated anything on the Arabs helping out the Indon ? Afterall, there is a NAM meeting in KL as this tragedy happened, and they all know the plight of the Indon. Is there a Utusan report of Arabs lending a hand ?
Funny.... since when the Israelies comply with UN resolutions.....
Since their good "neighbours" have not complied to resolution 181 (the 1st one). There is no reason to comply the following ones, right ? If eveyone complies to Resolution 181. Eveything should be fine.
O.k put it this way, try IMAGINE u are a palestinian who live happily in your home, suddenly a guy came to your house & demand u to hand over your house & land to him based on the reasons what you have just present - what would you do ? Are u going to comply peacefully ?
What makes you think there are no jews in the area before 1948 ? Infact, in the parcel of land, 55% or the original inhabitant are jews!
Alamak bro... again u failed to read my previous post carefully laaa.... & also plz check the provided link ler
The Faisal-Weizmann agreement survived only a few months. The outcome of the peace conference itself did not provide the vast Arab state that Faisal desired mainly because the British and French had struck their own secret Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 dividing the Middle East between their own spheres of influence, and soon Faisal began to express doubts about cooperation with the Zionist movement. Within a year he was calling on Britain to grant the Arabs of Palestine their political rights as part of his Syrian Kingdom.
But today, there are no French and British influence in the mideast. So, eventually, the Arabs did get their fairshare as Faisal had sought. Not immediately, but eventually.
What brew eveything up later was the influence of the Mufti.
I agreed ! The fall of Ottoman Empire did benefit the Arab but the brits & french gained the most ! The greatest loser is muslims !! We lost potential muslim super power & resulting Kamal Artartuk in Turkey & Wahabbism dynasty in today Saudi Arabia
The Brits and the French gain nothing. They have no influence in the mideast today. The main beneficiearies are the Arabs themselves.
You may think the the muslims are the loser, but the Arabs certainly don't think so!
You mean they want to abdicate their comfy position and surrender their wealth to the turks (the sick man of europe) ?
The Ottoman empire is extremely unpopular in mideast and no the arabs don't want to be under another european.
[ Last edited by gekko at 29-5-2006 05:08 PM ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by gekko at 29-5-2006 10:46 AM
and I quote from this Iranian site:
QUOTE:
The naming conventions for Persia (aka Iran) changed in 1935. The suggestion for the name change from Persia to Iran is said to have come from the Persian ambassador to Germany, who was a Nazi sympathizer. In 1935 Germany was ruled by Hitler. Aryanism was equated by the Nazis as the highest level of human civilization, in an article of faith based on a vulgar Hegelian hyperbola. Apparently the Persian ambassador was persuaded by his Nazi friends that Persia would be better off as an ally of Nazi Germany.
http://www.payvand.com/news/04/dec/1153.html
It is actually a disadvantage to rename the country. Today there are political forces to change the name of the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Gulf (more Arab nationalism).
From :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran#Name
Quote :
In the Achaemenid period, the Persian people called their country P?rsa, the Old Persian name for Cyrus the Great's clan. In the Sassanid period, they called it Iran, meaning "Land of the Aryans". The Greeks called the country Persis; this passed into Latin as Persia, which became the name widely used in the West until recently.[3][4][5]
In the twentieth century, a dispute arose over whether Iran or Persia is the correct name for the country. On 21 March 1935, the ruler of the country, Reza Shah Pahlavi, issued a decree asking foreign delegates to use the term Iran in formal correspondence. After some scholars protested, his succesor, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, announced in 1959 that both Persia and Iran were acceptable, and could be used interchangeably. The 1979 Revolution led to the establishment of the present day theocracy that is officially called the Islamic Republic of Iran, but the noun Persia and the adjective Persian are still commonly used.
The part that I was questioning was that even after eveything is know about Hitler and his geng, there are people (who want to gain world sympathy) but yet align themselves with dark forces like Nazism.
Let me ask you... who controll the media ? Something that u don't see in the media tak bermakna ia tak wujud..... I can post pictures of Skin Heads, Nazi Party & Klu Klux Clan burning the cross & do the nazi thing..... guess what ? They only happen in western christian majority country...
Aik?? Still not done with the religious bashing? Funny how sometimes we see people condemning Nazism acting like one themselves (see Israel). Its not the religion... its the person...
I agreed with mat_toro comment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 21 March 1935, the ruler of the country, Reza Shah Pahlavi, issued a decree asking foreign delegates to use the term Iran in formal correspondence.
You ignore the political significance of the name change and the date of the name change.
While, the word Iran does has persian origins, but the name change was done in 1935, becoz the Persians want to be allies with Hitler and Nazism.
To put it bluntly, Reza Shah wanted to bodek Hitler.
It has nothing to do with Persian culture/historical etc. Infact, they are better known as Persia as all the product like carpet etc are link to the ancient name.
Let me ask you... who controll the media ? Something that u don't see in the media tak bermakna ia tak wujud..... I can post pictures of Skin Heads, Nazi Party & Klu Klux Clan burning the cross & do the nazi thing..... guess what ? They only happen in western christian majority country...
Guess what, those skinhead, KKK etc are BANNED and are considred pariah.
But the Palestinain Authority, is supposed to be the official representative of the Palestinian people. Yet, they aligned with the dark forces with their Nazi salute etc. They want to become the pariah too ?
I guess its a no brainer why their plight did not improve and why they are considered a terrorist organisation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aku sebenarnya letih dah nak explain that RELIGION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TERRORISM... aku a bit surprise by Gekko punya statements & arguments, not that aku kagum atau ape, biasanya aku jumpe non-muslim yg 'bias' pada Islam...
I tried to be as objectives as possible in my posting
I believe you refer to yourself ?
I just pointed out your error aje... I 'am replying to yourI suppose the concept of brotherhood goes to far when you say that covers those who did wrong 29-5-2006 10:42 AM #102
if you so ego to accept, it is up to you bro... :pmuka:
So why "defend" the Mufti who was guilty of racialism and atrocities.....see the new article that started this thread. Written by who ?
Not me..
Is that in accordance to the hadith you provided ?
yup ! have u read Sirah Nabi or anywhere in history Nabi Muhammad S.A.W do mass killing women & children ? The mufti was appointed by the British, Herbert Samuel, the first high commissioner of Palestine (a British Jew) and the mufti was dismissed from his position following the riots of 1936. So technically he is no longer a mufti when he met Hitler In November 1941.
I see him more like a nasionalist ! dikala bangsa arab ketika itu (sekarang pun) dijajah & lemah serta dgn kejatuhan empire ottomans he is trying so hard to prevent the brits from making Palestineans as Jewish Country, no wonder the only choice is to aligned himself with Hitler...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husayni
If he do something not accordance to islamic teaching... certainly it's not islamic & all muslims cannot be blame for his actions
Another example (this is actually off-topic)....you know Azahari Husin ? The guy who died in Indon called a terrorist ?
Have u seen how many serbs meratap Slovodan Milosovic in Serbia ? Remember what he did to Bosnian muslim in Sebrenica ? I did'nt remember anybody call him a christian terrorist ?
I believe they only acted after much critism. So have any M'sia news report stated anything on the Arabs helping out the Indon ? Afterall, there is a NAM meeting in KL as this tragedy happened, and they all know the plight of the Indon. Is there a Utusan report of Arabs lending a hand ?
U totally lack of muslim punya culture or tradition, many non-govt & private donations dtg mencurah2 from muslim country to acheh, biasanya without names, anony sender u can ask our sukarelawan kat sana la bro..... cuma non-muslim country yg suka publisiti setiap kali diorang menderma dan selalunya ada udang sebalik batu - look what happen to Hamas govt now ? They are democratic elected govt, yet the west cut all fundings to them
Since their good "neighbours" have not complied to resolution 181 (the 1st one). There is no reason to comply the following ones, right ? If eveyone complies to Resolution 181. Eveything should be fine.
What a brilliant answer......??? Dlm tahun 1947 berapa banyak negara Islam yg dah merdeka dlm PBB ? Resolution 181 also declared Jerusalem to be a corpus separatum - a separate body, to be run under an international UN administration. The area to be run in this way included all of Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Beit Sahour, to encompass the Christian holy sites. Do you honestly think Israel going to let go Jerusalem? how about golan height ?  u talk as Israel is the victim here...
quote:
David Ben-Gurion declared in 1938, "after we become a strong force, as a result of the creation of a state, we shall abolish partition and expand into the whole of Palestine" In 1948, Menachem Begin said, "The partition of the Homeland is illegal. It will never be recognized. The signature of institutions and individuals of the partition agreement is invalid. It will not bind the Jewish people. Jerusalem was and will forever be our capital. Eretz Israel (the land of Israel) will be restored to the people of Israel, All of it. And forever".
http://july.fixedreference.org/e ... 7_UN_Partition_Plan
Today...
What makes you think there are no jews in the area before 1948 ? Infact, in the parcel of land, 55% or the original inhabitant are jews!
I dont know where u got your data..... from the same link above (UN Partition Plan For Palestine 1947)
Quote :
The Arab leadership opposed the plan, arguing that it violated the rights of the majority of the people in Palestine, which at the time was 67% non-Jewish (1,237,000) and 33% Jewish (608,000). They criticised the amount and quality of land given to Israel. The Jews had been offered 55% percent of the land when they only owned 7%. Although it should be noted that much of the land area was not actually owned by anyone (Jewish or Arab) -- it was desert under the control of the British Mandate. The population for the proposed Jewish State would be 498,000 Jews and 325,000 non-Jews. The population for the proposed Arab State would be 807,000 non-Jews and 10,000 Jews. The population for the proposed International Zone would be 105,000 non-Jews and 100,000 Jews.
Aku rase angka di atas adalah termasuk kaum pendatang yahudi yg di bawa masuk oleh British !
But today, there are no French and British influence in the mideast. So, eventually, the Arabs did get their fairshare as Faisal had sought. Not immediately, but eventually.
R u kidding me ???? What kind of answer is that....  : r u for real ?? we are talking about history here ! How the hell are they going to know what is going to happen in the future (today) ??
Note : Dude... THE YANKS control the middle east now.. :pmuka:
The Brits and the French gain nothing. They have no influence in the mideast today. The main beneficiearies are the Arabs themselves.
Again... r u on drug or something ??? I just don't get it...... The Brits are in IRAQ right now !! France still sell weapons to the middle east countries... If they gain nothing why did they invade another country at the first place ??
Quote :
France seeks to regain lost power in Mideast politics
LEE YANOWITCH
Jewish Telegraphic Agency
PARIS -- France, determined to recapture its influence in the Middle East, is positioning itself as a new power broker in the region -- much to the dismay of Israel and the United States.
From a strategic standpoint, France, which had a mandate over Lebanon and Syria between the two world wars, wants a share of what it sees as an American monopoly over Mideast affairs.
http://www.jewishsf.com/content/ ... ml/displaystory.htm
Aku melihat orang islam sebagai mangsa permainan politik licik golongan anti-islam & kuasa barat, British sendiri menjajah Malaysia tampa petumpahan darah tetapi hanya dengan kepandaian berpolitik begitu juga Negara Thai yg terselamat dari dijajah kerana Raja mereka ketika itu bijak menangani pengaruh asing nie...
Recommended Read : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Middle_East
Kita boleh bercakap ttg kekejaman Hitler terhadap bangsa Yahudi, tetapi kita lupa bukan shj bangsa yahudi shj yg terlibat... BAGAIMANA PULA KEKEJAMAN JOSEPH STALIN, VLAD DRACULA, POL POT, NANKING MASSACRE etc..
Stalin - 60 million dead http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE4.HTM
Mao - 35 million dead http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE2.HTM
Hitler - 20 million dead http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE3.HTM
Pol Pot - 10 milion dead http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP6.HTM
Bosnia, Rwanda, North Korea - close to 1 million each http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM
Quote :
The Holocaust was more than a Jewish event. Records kept by the Germans prove they exterminated millions of Communists, Czechs, Greeks, Gypsies, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, mentally and physically handicapped, Poles, resistance fighters, Russians, Serbs, Socialists, Spanish Republicans, trade unionists, Ukrainians, Yugoslavians, prisoners of war of many nations, and still others whose identity may never be recognized.(1) Their victims, according to one survivor of four different concentration camps, "were of some thirty nationalities, from Nepalese to Andorrans, and of a variety of racial and linguistic stocks ranging from Basques to Buriats and from Ladinos to Lapps".(2) When people were not immediately exterminated, they were sent to work and/or concentration camps. There the prisoners were divided into six penal categories and given patches on their clothing for identification purposes. Ordinary criminals were assigned green; political prisoners wore red; black was worn by asocials (slackers, prostitutes, procurers, etc.); homosexuals wore pink; conscientious objectors wore purple, and the Jewish people wore yellow.(3)
http://www.uca.edu/divisions/academic/history/cahr/holocaust.htm
http://www.holocaustforgotten.com/fivmil.htm
[ Last edited by ef/x at 1-6-2006 01:09 PM ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blood and betrayal
The real moving force in "The Great War for Civilisation" is history. It is history -- made by men -- that ushered in the Middle East's nightmares. For the people of the Middle East, Fisk notes, history has never gone away -- they live it, and die it, every day. The book's ironic title derives from a medal Fisk's father was awarded for his service in World War I -- the first of those "great wars for civilization," of which the latest is being enacted in Fallujah and Ramadi today. World War I plays a key and recurring role in Fisk's book in two ways. It provides the frame for an exploration of his problematic father Bill's life, in particular an enigmatic incident in which Fisk the elder refused to command a firing squad to execute a condemned man -- the one moment when Fisk felt his father acted in accord with the humanistic principles the younger man embraced. And, more important, it was the Great War, and the betrayals of Western promises made to the Arabs that followed it, that created the modern Middle East.
"My father, the old soldier of 1918, read my account of the Lebanon war but would not live to see this book," Fisk writes. "Yet he would always look into the past to understand the present. If only the world had not gone to war in 1914; if only we had not been so selfish in concluding the peace. We victors promised independence to the Arabs and support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Promises are meant to be kept. And so those promises -- the Jews naturally thought that their homeland would be in all of Palestine -- were betrayed, and the millions of Arabs and Jews of the Middle East are now condemned to live with the results."
Fisk writes that "I have witnessed events that, over the years, can only be called 'an arrogance of power.' The Iranians used to call the United States 'the center of world arrogance,' and I would laugh at this, but I have begun to understand what it means. After the Allied victory of 1918, at the end of my father's war, the victors divided up the lands of their former enemies. In the space of just seventeen months, they created the borders of Northern Ireland, Yugoslavia and most of the Middle East. And I have spent my entire career -- in Belfast and Sarajevo, in Beirut and Baghdad -- watching the people within those borders burn."
The most crucial and incendiary borders are those that mark out the state of Israel. As Fisk observes, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict "is an epic tragedy whose effects have spread around the world and continue to poison the lives of not only the participants but of our entire Western political and military policies towards the Middle East and the Muslim lands." Yet this crucial conflict is a subject very few Americans, including journalists, want to bring up. (It is much less taboo in Europe and, ironically, in Israel itself.) Passions run too high, and it is too interminable and complicated; better to say nothing and accept the status quo. As anyone who has spoken out on this subject knows, there is little reward for doing so.
Fisk has been accused of being obsessed with Israeli injustices against the Palestinians. If he is, the terrible events he witnessed in 1982 go a long way to explaining his obsession. At the heart of his book about the Lebanese war, "Pity the Nation," is a long and nightmarish account of the Sabra and Shatila massacre, in which hundreds or perhaps thousands of unarmed Palestinian refugees -- men, women and children -- were slaughtered by the Lebanese Phalangist allies of the invading Israeli army. Fisk, who was one of the first journalists on the scene, reported, and an official Israeli investigation confirmed, that Israeli troops knew about the massacre but made no real efforts to stop it. This episode is seared into Fisk's mind. In "The Great War for Civilisation," Fisk describes his repeated and vain attempts to draw the world's attention to the massacre, and to the Palestinian plight in general. "[F]ollowing [the Palestinians'] travail, the task of reporting their hopeless political leadership, their victimisation -- most cruelly demonstrated when they were turned into the aggressors by an all-powerful Israel and, later, an even more hegemonic United States -- and their pathetic, brave, and often callous attempts to seek the world's sympathy has been one of the most depressing experiences in journalism," he writes. "The more we wrote about the Palestinian dispossession, the less effect it seemed to have and the more we were abused as journalists." Fisk's passion on the subject cannot be understood without considering both what he saw, and what he has not been able to communicate.
In his new book, Fisk is clearly trying to be heard by those who come to the subject from an opposite perspective. He tells the strange story of Haji Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and the first Palestinian leader, whose desperate search for allies led him to travel to Nazi Germany and embrace Hitler -- an act often cited by supporters of Israel, and one that Fisk condemns. As in "Pity the Nation," Fisk writes eloquently not just about the Palestinians who were driven or fled from their homes in 1948, but also about the Jews who took over those homes -- Jews who in many cases survived the Holocaust.
But if he is sympathetic to those on both sides, he refuses to ignore the historic injustice visited on 750,000 innocent Palestinians, whose lives were shattered by a chain of events set in motion by a letter written by a British statesman in 1917. Like Edward Said, Fisk asks why the Palestinians should have had to answer first for Britain's fateful colonial decision, and then for Germany's sins. "Why did the Palestinians have to bear the fate of Britain's First World War promise to a people whose ancestors lived on their land two thousand years before? Why did this new flood of Muslim refugees have to pay this price, then -- like the Armenians -- be told that they were the aggressors, and those who dispossessed them the victims? For in the decades to come, the Palestinians would be the 'terrorists' and those who took their lands would be the innocent, the representatives of a Phoenix rising from the ashes of Auschwitz. In the eyes of the world -- especially in 1948, in a world grown weary of war and familiar with the millions of refugees who had washed across Europe -- what was the lot of 750,000 Palestinian refugees when measured against the murder of six million Jews?"
Fisk offers a depressing account of the incompetent Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, who agreed to the fatally flawed Oslo "peace process" -- which Western pundits stridently insisted would resolve the conflict. In fact, as Fisk and many others have noted, Oslo never had a chance because it postponed the critical issues, and because during the Oslo years Israeli expansion in the occupied territories was greatly accelerated. "More than any other event, this huge colonial expansion proved to Palestinians that Oslo was a sham, a lie, a trick to entangle Arafat and the PLO into the abandonment of all that they had sought and struggled for for over a quarter of a century, a method of creating false hope in order to emasculate the aspiration of statehood." For Fisk, the key difference between the two sides boils down to this: "The Arabs wanted their land back and then they wanted peace with Israel. The Israelis wanted peace but wanted to keep some of the Arab land." This was a recipe for the deadlock that exists to this day.
http://dir.salon.com/story/books ... isk/index.html?pn=3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, this thread has gone from Muslim SS division to history of Israel....whatever la guys! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by alphawolf at 30-5-2006 08:18 AM
Now, this thread has gone from Muslim SS division to history of Israel....whatever la guys!
Kui kui kui kui kui : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply #112 atan's post
Aku cuma menjawap ape yg diutarakan oleh Gekko plus a few insights from History wakakaka
ntah ler... aku pun dah letih dah :geram::ting: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDITED!
[ Last edited by jazim at 31-5-2006 04:19 PM ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by mmc at 30-5-2006 02:43 PM
ff: wei NG bila nak pakai avatar baru...ini ok kut..
o.k. good idea........mmc.
Thanks....... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st thread aku bukak, reply berjela2. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by Kilokahn at 30-5-2006 10:23 PM
1st thread aku bukak, reply berjela2.
dapat sambutan  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by Kilokahn at 30-5-2006 10:23 PM
1st thread aku bukak, reply berjela2.
terus dapat goldmember ka...ini ranking baru ke...boleh double meaning tu  :nerd: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Post time 29-5-2006 10:25 AM
Author
