Important Memorandum from the Hamas Charter #5.

[Michele]

You know how generally it is Hamas first charter that is circulated with no commentary or analysis what so ever well this is an:

Important Memorandum from the Hamas (Charter #5) to the Kings, Presidents, and Ministers Meeting at Sharm al-Sheikh (1996)...


In the name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful:

Majesties, Highnesses, Excellencies--- the Conferees at Sharm al-Sheikh:

Being convinced of the necessity of informing you of the nature of the slamic Resistance Movement and clarifying the imperatives that govern its politcal and military work, we present to you this memorandum to explain our goals and policies, hoping that it will gain your careful attention.

We, in Hamas, are a political movement resisting occupation and its actions, which violate the canons of revealed law and many principles of international law both in times of peace and war.

Our movement strives to accomplish this in two ways. The first method is political. Inasmuch as Hamas is a part of the national liberation movement of the Palestinian people, it seeks to gain their internationally established national rights, foremost among them being the rights of self-determination, establishing an independent state, and the return of all refugees and displaced persons to their homes.

The second method is military. This flows in the same direction as the first; this method was resorted to only after all political and peaceful means were exhausted without the palestinian people and its movement seeing any tangible results that might lead to the realization of our national goals.

Hamas believes in political work, just as it believes i armed struggle, because each has a role in realizing these rights. Further, Hamas with its two wings, the political and the military, is regarded as a national resistance and liberation movement working against the occupiers, who are considered transgressors against contemporary international law. Hence, the armed actions of members of the Qassam Brigades ought to be considered as defensive actions, with the exception of some unintended injuries to civilians

(THIS CHARTER WRITTEN BEFORE THE OVERT AND REGULAR TARGETING OF CIVILANS ADDITION MINE).

We regard the Israeli presence in all its forms it the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza strip to be an occupational presence--this being consistent with the text of successive UN resolutions ad with the announced official positions of most governments in the world since 1967.

In particular, UN Security Council Resolution No. 242 called for the immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories that were occupied in 1967, but the Israeli authorities still refuse to cmply with the text and the spirit of this resolution.

The fundamental cause of instability in the Middle East derives from continuous Israeli aggression agains the rights of the Palestinian people, aggression that began with usurpoing its land and exiling its people to various corners of the world under the bayonets of terrorism and intimidation. Israel still applies against the Palestinian people all manner of strigent repressive measures that ignore the basic forms of human rights as enunciated in international aggrements, the Fourth Geneva Convention, and the Universal Declarations of Human Rights. In addition, it maintains complete control of Palestinian natural resources, arrogating itself the right to dispose of private and public property as it sees fit, and facilitating the settlement of Jews migrating from Russian, eastern Europe, and other places. Israel continues to do these things despite signing a peace agreement with the PLO.


from this book which I happen to have:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/088728275X/002-0538481-8081628?v=glance&vi=contents

The book provides a fluid analysis of hamas as it evolved from it's first charter in 1988 which is also in the book in it's entirety.

Even since this fifth charter just in the last year Hamas made clear it stood in line with the peace proposal mapped out in the roadmap... with some members including Rantisi outwardly stating his support of the roadmap, but not of the deceptive way in which Hamas observed Oslo took form. They have maintained since the start of this last intifada that they would ceasefire upon a full IDF withdrawal from the occupied territories. Anyone here who has these interviews as sources can place them here.

I will continue add the rest of Charter 5 in due time.

[Michele]

before I continue let us remember the declaration for ceasefire from July of 2002.

here is one of many summaries of just how Israel apprised the declaration for ceasefire:

In July 2002, Israel moved quickly to avert yet another political catastrophe. With assistance from European diplomats, militant Palestinian organizations, including Hamas, reached an accord to suspend all attacks inside Israel, perhaps paving the way for a return to the negotiating table. Just 90 minutes before it was to be announced, however, Israeli leaders - fully apprised of the imminent declaration - ordered an F-16 to drop a one-ton bomb on a densely-populated civilian neighborhood in Gaza, killing, alongside a Hamas leader, 11 children and five others, and injuring 140. Predictably, the declaration was scrapped and Palestinian terrorist attacks resumed with a vengeance. "What is the wisdom here?" a Meretz party leader asked the Knesset. "At the very moment that it appeared that we were on the brink of a chance for reaching something of a cease-fire, or diplomatic activity, we always go back to this experience - just when there is a period of calm, we liquidate." Yet, having headed off another dastardly Palestinian "peace offensive," the murderous assault made perfect sense. Small wonder Sharon hailed it as "one of our greatest successes." (52) Scoring still another major political victory the next month, the Israeli government blocked Israeli peace activists from linking up with 700 of their Palestinian counterparts in Bethlehem. Reporting from Bethlehem, Amira Hass observed that many Palestinians were endeavoring to "open a pubic debate aimed at reducing Palestinian support for attacks inside Israel, without waiting for a change in Israeli policy." The joint demonstration, she continued, "was an example of that type of effort. It was an effort that failed, foiled by the Israeli authorities." (53)

more...
http://www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node.php?id=734

part II
http://www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node.php?id=735

[Michele]

OKAY Re: Hamas Charter of 1988.

Hey Mr. America where did you go... cause I am going to tell you straight up this is kind of a distorted verision that Prof. Israeli has here... particularly if you don't have the whole charter...I also pulled up two other versions one from a site mideastweb.org and one from palestinecenter.org. My book is from the Institute for Palestine Studies. They are all different, on superficial glance most probably in translation but also in the citing of verse numbers.

Which is also interesting because when verse is cited it also correlates to a name of who is speaking. I must say of the three versions on the internet.

1) I find it interesting you chose the most incomplete version of the charter.
2) I am not particularly thrilled with the mideastweb.org version either.

Considering that Prof. Israeli only choose *selected* passages, and based on which ones; his translation IMO is useless to me, made so by the "virtue" of his intent. I am going to work from my book only because it appears to be the more.... well I am really not sure why... but for the fact as it provides dry analysis of the group as well as the manifestation and reasoning behind each declaration they made throughout the years.

For the record: the Prof Israeli version is from a site named: Christian Action For Israel
http://www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/isreport/hamas.html

Raphael Israeli: is a Professor of Islamic, Middle Eastern and Chinese history at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Professor Israeli is the author of 15 books and some 80 scholarly articles in those domains. A member of the Steering Committee of the Ariel Center for Policy Research (ACPR), his work in Hebrew, French and English frequently appears in leading international publications including NATIV.

The ACPR web site contains a section regarding two appearances "on the Hill" by ACPR, both in 1997 for Congressman Jim Saxon and Congressman Bill McCollum, as well as a section entitled "Isreal's Friends", which consists of three speeches made by Thomas D. DeLay (R-Tx), House Majority Leader.

Researchers / Contributing Experts

"Presently, the ACPR does not employ a regular group of researchers, but rather orders specific research projects and policy papers from a pool of internationally renowned experts on the Middle East and related strategic affairs."

Contributing Experts for ACPR include:

* Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.
* Meyrav Wurmser (Wurmser's Wife heads up MEMRI)
http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Ariel_Center_for_Policy_Research


Version I have is translated by Khaled Hroub with analysis
I am only now checking Mr Khaled Hroub Biography

Khaled Hroub is a former Visiting Fellow of the Centre of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, University of Cambridge, and a Queens' College member. He is host of a weekly book-review programme on Al-Jazeera; author of Hamas: Political Thought and Practice (Washington DC) 2000, and editor of Arab Satellite Broadcasting: a force of integration or fragmentation in the Arab World (forthcoming, 2003). Mr Hroub worked for the Middle East Programme of the International Institute of International Studies, London (IISS); his latest publication related to this conference was 'Towards the deconstruction of Arab ghettos in the West after September 11, 2001', which appeared in 'Shu'un Arabyya' [Arab Affairs], March 2002, The Arab League journal, Cairo.

SOMETHING FROM HIS BROADCAST:
http://www.sant.ox.ac.uk/princeton/pap_hroub.shtml

NOW MR. AMERICA AS TO THIS QUANDARY WITH THE QUOTE FROM MUHAMAD. ALTHOUGH I AM NOT CERTAIN I BELIEVE THE QUOTE REFERENCES END TIMES. NOR AM I CERTAIN IT IS A DIRECT QUOTE FROM KORAN AS THERE IS NO VERSE CITED AFTER THE QUOTE IN QUESTION, SO THAT FOR ME REMAINS TO BE SEEN. YOU HAVE PULLED IT FROM A VERY SELECTED TRANSLATION OF THE HAMAS CHARTER. WHICH VARY'S IN PLACES FROM THE VERSION I HAVE. LET ME SEE IF I CAN VERY BRIEFL ILLUSTRATE THIS BEFORE I PLACE THE TWO VERSIONS WHICH REFERENCE THIS BUHKRAN CITING SIDE BY SIDE:

Firstly, Prof Israeli's Version or PIV starts with this and nothing more:

Preamble:..."Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors." The Imam and Martyr Hasan al-Banna

Khaled Hroub's version or KHV starts at the very beginning of the charter I will bold the overlapping quote for easy comparison:

In the Name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate:

You are the best community that has been raised up for manhind, enjoining right conduct and forbidding what isbad, and believing in God. If the People of the Book had believed, it would be better for them; some among them have faith, but most of them are sinners. They will not harm you, except for trifling annoyances; if they fight you, they will turn their backs, and no help shall they get.

Shame is pitched over them wheresoever they are found, except when under a covenant of God and from the people. They have incurred the wrath of God and pitched over them is destitution. This is because they rejected the signs of God and slew the Prophets in definance of right. This is because they rebelled and transgressed beyond all bounds.

Quran, Surah 3 (al-'Imran), v. 109-111

Israel will rise and will remain firm until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated what was before.

The Martyred imam Hasan al-Banna (may God have mercy on his soul)

The Islamic World is burning. Therefore, it is incumbent oneveryone to put a little of it out so that he can extinquish what he is able to do without waiting for anyone else.

Sheikh Amjad al -Zahawee (may God have mercy on his soul)

THAT ENDS WHAT PIV NAMED THE PREAMBLE. MOVING ON IN NEXT POST...

[Michele]

PIV THEN QUOTES ONE OF 4 PARAGRAPHS FROM THE INTRODUCTION. READING THROUGH ALL 4 PARAGRAPHS FROM KH's FULL VERSION OF THE INTRODUCTION WHAT I AM STRUCK BY, IS THAT THE PARAGRAPH THAT PI SELECTED FROM ALL 4 IS THE ONE PARAGRAPH THAT MENTIONS THE WORD *JEWS*.

I CAN NOT YET BE CERTAIN, BUT MY BEST GUESS WOULD BE THAT WAS WHAT DETERMINED PI's SELECTIONS: ANY MENTIONS OF THE WORD *JEWS* OR THE WORD *ISRAEL*. OF COURSE BASED ON THE FACT THAT AT THE TIME OF THE FIRST CHARTER, HAMAS HAD EMBRACED THE CONSPIRACY OF THE PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION, AND THAT PALESTINIANS HAD BEEN UNDER ZIONIST OCCUPATION BY THAT TIME 20 YEARS, THEIR LAND (FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE) TAKEN TO ACCOMODATE JEWS; FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE IT ISN'T STUNNING THAT FROM TIME TO TIME HAMAS WOULD NAME *JEWS* AND *ISRAEL* AS THE ENEMY OF HAMAS AND THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE.

AS I MENTIONED ALREADY THE LANGUAGE OF THE DECLARATIONS OVER TIME, ONCE THEY DISCARDED JEWISH CONSPIRACY THEORY, DIRECTED ITSELF MOST SPECIFICALLY TOWARD THE ZIONIST OCCUPATION, RATHER THAN TO THE JEWS THAT WERE TAKING OVER THE WHOLE OF THE WORLD. BUT IT BARES MENTIONING THAT HAMAS WAS DEALING WITH THEIR WORLD ON THE GROUND IN PALESTINE WHICH INDEED JEWS DID TAKE OVER. WHILE SOME MAY NOT APPRECIATE THIS DEMARCATION, IT IS SIGNFICANT OF HAMAS' HONING IN MORE PRECISE TERMS WHAT FORMED THE BASIS OF THEIR RESISTANCE AND WHAT WAS THE CAUSE OF THE RESISTANCE... WHICH OF COURSE DELINEATES IN THEIR MIND NAMING ZIONIST OCCUPATION AND THOSE JEWS THAT BACK IT THEIR ENEMY. I WOULD THINK THAT IS A FAIR INTERPRETATION.

That said, we will only compare the one of the 4 paragraphs PI selected from the Introduction of the 1988 charter:

Prof Israeli's Version of 4th and last paragrah of Charter's Introduction:


"...This is the Charter of the Islamic Resistance (Hamas) which will reveal its face, unveil its identity, state its position, clarify its purpose, discuss its hopes, call for support to its cause and reinforcement, and for joining its ranks. For our struggle against the Jews is extremely wide ranging and grave, so much so that it will need all the loyal efforts we can wield, to be followed by further steps and reinforced by successive battalions from the multifarious Arab and Islamic world, until the enemies are defeated and Allah's victory prevails. Thus we shall perceive them approaching in the horizon, and this will be known before long: "Allah has decreed: Lo! I very shall conquer, I and my messengers, lo! Allah is strong, almighty."
Sura 58 (Al-Mujadilah), verse 21.

Khaled Hroub's version of 4th and last paragrah of Charter's Introduction:

This is the Charter of the Islamic Resistance Movement [Al-Harakah al-Muqawamah al-Islamiyya (Hamas)], showing its form, revealing its identity, stating its position, clarifying its expectations, discussing its hopes, and calling for aid, support, and a joining of its ranks, because our struggle with the Jews is long and dangerous, requiring all dedicated efforts. It is a phase that must be followed by succeeding phases, a battalion that must be supported by battalion of the vast Arab and Islamic world until the enemy is defeated and the victory of God prevails.

This is how we preceive them approaching over the horizon.

And you shall certainly know the truth of it after a while.

Surah 38 (Sad), v.88

God has decreed: It is I and my messengers who must prevail, for God is one full of strength and able to enforce His will.

Surah 58 (al-Mujadilah), v.21

NOTE THE SPECIFIC CITING OF KORAN VERSE, AS I AM NOW MOVING TO THE QUOTE IN QUESTION. WHAT YOU WILL NOTICE IS NO VERSE IS QUOTED FROM KORAN. ME THINKS THAT PLACES THE QUOTE IN QUESTION... FOR IT IS CITED INSTEAD BY BUHKARI AND MUSLIM (I DO NOT KNOW WHO HE IS) WITH NO REFERENCE TO VERSE.

OKAY MOVING ON... TO NEXT POST.

[Independent]

The Intelligence Network (http://intellnet.org/resources/hamas_communiques/hamas/comm_text/2002/31jan02a.htm)

On American president Bush’s terrorism charges against Hamas

A responsible source in the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, stated the following:

The American administration’s media declarations accusing the Movement of terrorism have escalated the latest of which was American president George Bush’s statement on 29/1/2002AD before the Congress charging Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hizbullah and other movements and countries with terrorism or sponsoring terrorism. He called for wiping out terrorists and affirmed that the USA would act in this direction if the concerned governments did not act on their own. In the light of all this and in response to it we in the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, affirm the following:

1- Resistance against occupation is a legitimate and legal right and is a principle endorsed by UN charter. The Hamas Movement and other Palestinian forces exercise that right with the goal of ending Zionist occupation. This right of resisting occupation coincides with all heavenly and international norms in addition to the UN charter.

2- The American administration’s definition of terrorism is linked to its interests and ambitions and not based on international law. The USA seeks to categorize the Palestinian resistance forces as terrorist organizations in a bid to weaken the Palestinian people, curb their anti-occupation resistance, enforce their surrender to the usurping Zionist enemy and endorse occupation in a serious international precedence.

3- The statement clearly reflect the degree of American bias in favor of the Zionist entity to the extent that the American administration was viewing the Palestinian people through Zionist eyes and deal with the Palestinian people’s inalienable rights as mere requests that occupation might or might not grant. It also considers the Palestinian legitimate anti-occupation resistance as terrorism while ignoring the real terrorism practiced by occupation against the Palestinian people.

4- The American administration’s hostility against Palestinian resistance movements is in reality a hostility against the Palestinian people and the entire Arab and Islamic Nation because the resistance program is a broad-based national program that enjoys sweeping support among our Palestinian people and is not limited to a specific Palestinian movement. It furthermore enjoys a large-scale Arab and Islamic backing in its capacity as the Nation’s real choice. Hence America’s antagonism of Hamas and Palestinian resistance movements put it in confrontation with all Arabs and Muslims.

snip

[Michele]

OKAY MR. AMERICA THE QUOTE YOU PULLED IS WITHIN ARTICLE 7 OF THE 1988 HAMAS CHARTER: Again I will quote them both. This time I will underline that portion in the Hroub full version which coincides with the passages Prof. Israeli selected to pull.

Prof Israeli's SELECTED Version of Article 7:


Article Seven - THE UNIVERSALITY OF HAMAS
By virtue of the distribution of Muslims, who pursue the cause of the Hamas, all over the globe, and strive for its victory, for the enforcement of its positions and for the encouragement of its Jihad, the Movement is a universal one...Whoever denigrates its worth, or avoids supporting it, or is so blind as to dismiss its role, is challenging Fate itself. Whoever closes his eyes from seeing the facts, whether intentionally or not, will wake up to find himself overtaken by events, and will find no excuses to justify his position...

Hamas is one of the links in the Chain of Jihad in the confrontation with the Zionist invasion. It links up with the setting out of the Martyr Izz a-din al-Qassam and his brothers in the Muslim Brotherhood who fought the Holy War in 1936; it further relates to another link of the Palestinian Jihad and the Jihad and efforts of the Muslim Brothers during the 1948 War, and to the Jihad operations of the Muslim Brothers in 1968 and thereafter...

...Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah's promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said:
"The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them; until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!
Cited by Bukhari and Muslim"

Khaled Hroub's Version of Article 7:

By virtue of the distrubtion of Muslims, who adopt the system of the Islamic Resistance Movement al over the globe, they work toward aiding it, accepting its positions and strengthening its Jihad. Therefore, it is a universal movement, and it is prepared for this because of the clarity of its ideology, lofty goal, and the holiness of its objectives. Upon this basis it should be considered, given a fair evaluation, and acceptance of its role. Whoever cheats it of its right, avoids supporting it, or is so blind as to ignore its role, then that is the person we argues with fate. And whoever closes his eyes to reality, intentionally or unintentionally, one day will wake up to find himself left behind and worn down by efforts to justify his position. Reward is for those who are early.

The oppression of close relatives is more painful for the soule than the blow of a sharp sword.

And unto thee We revealed the scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: So judge between them by what God has revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the truth that has come to thee. To each among you We have prescribed a law and an open way. If God had so willed, He would have made you one pople, but He tests you in what He has given you. So strive as if in a race in all virtues. The goal of all of you is to Gold. It is He who will show you the truth of matters wherein y ou differ.

Surah 5 (al-Ma'idah), v. 48

The Islamic Resistance Movement is a link in the chain of Jihad against the Zionist occupation. It is tied to the initiation of the Jihad by the Martyr 'Izzidin al-Qassam and his Mujahid brothers in 1936. And it is connected to other episodes in the Jihad of the Palestinian people, the Jihad of the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1948 War and the Jihad operations of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1968 and thereafter. This is so even though the episodes were few and far between and the Jihad was intermittent due to the obstalces placed in the way of the mujahidin by those in the Zionists' orbit. The Islamic Resistance Movement looks forward to implementing God's promise no matter how long it takes because the Prophet of God (may peace be upon his soul), said:

[u]The Final Hour will not come until Muslims fight against the Jews and the Muslims kill them, and until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, and a stone or tree would say: O Muslim, servant of God, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! But the tree of Gharqad would not say it, for it is the tree of the Jews (cited by Bukhari and Muslim)


---------------

NOW MR. AMERICA YOU CAN JUMP IN AT ANY TIME

Several things... reserved for next post

[Michele]

1. as I mentioned this appears to be referring to end times.
2. there is no reference to koran verse
3. I am looking for the quote as if it is the word of the prophet it would be cited in the koran

Sahih Bukhari is a collection of sayings and deeds of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), also known as the sunnah. The reports of the Prophet's sayings and deeds are called ahadith. Bukhari lived a couple of centuries after the Prophet's death and worked extremely hard to collect his ahadith....

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/sbtintro.html

4. for some reason I went to book 88. as my hunch is the quote references end times (The Final Hour)... Needless to say I haven't found the quote yet... this is what need to be saught through:

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/

5. I did come upon this interesting site as well:

Dhimmi

A Dhimmi, or Zimmi (Arabic ذمّي), as defined in classical Islamic legal and political literature, is a person living in a Muslim state who is a member of an officially tolerated non-Muslim religion. The term literally means "protected person."

Etymology

The root of "dhimmi" comes from the Arabic root "dh-m-m", where "dhimma" means "being in the care of".

Background

The term initially applied to "People of the Book" living in lands under Muslim rule, namely Jews and Christian, and was extended to Zoroastrians, Mandeans and even Hindus.

The dhimmi concept was comparatively tolerant by the standards of the time. Christians and Jews were allowed to live in peace within the Muslim society. An excellent example is the Muslim state of Cordoba in Southern Spain where Christians and Jews prospered. Maimonides, by some considered the greatest Jewish philosopher and Talmudic sage, lived in Muslim Spain, North Africa and Egypt. As late as the 16th century, religious tolerance in Europe was greatest within the Ottoman Empire.

MAIMONIDES IS AN INTERESTING SAGE PARTICULARLY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT IS TERMED CLASSICAL JUDAISM, BUT LET'S NOT GET INTO THAT AT THE MOMENT

Muslims living in less conservative or more multiconfessional nations typically present the dhimmi as being equal to Muslims. For example, one book published in Pakistan claims:

Islam does not permit discrimination in the treatment of other human beings on the basis of religion or any other criteria... it emphasises neighborliness and respect for the ties of relationship with non-Muslims ...within this human family, Jews and Christians, who share many beliefs and values with Muslims, constitute what Islam terms Ahl al-Kitab, that is, People of the Scripture, and hence Muslim have a special relationship to them as fellow "Scriptuaries". (Suzanne Haneef, What everyone should know about Islam and Muslims, Kazi Publications, Lahore, 1979, p. 173.

In contrast, Muslims living in more traditionalist or monocultural nations, particularly those that practice Sharia, usually present the dhimmi as being a second to Muslims. For example, one book published in Saudi Arabia argues:

In a country ruled by Muslim authorities, a non-Muslim is guaranteed his freedom of faith.... Muslims are forbidden from obliging a non-Muslim to embrace Islam....

Status of Dhimmis

For several centuries following the codification of the Quran, the Islamic Caliphate expanded mainly through warfare. Conquered peoples - including Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Sabians, and Hindus - became dhimmis: protected citizens under Islamic law, allowed the rights listed below on condition of paying the taxes mentioned below.

Rights:

* Protection by the Islamic state
* Right to reside in Muslim lands
* Right of worship according to their own religion
* Right to work and trade
* Protection of life, wealth and honor by the Muslim state (even against other co-religionist states)

Exemptions:

* Exemption from paying zakah "alms to the poor"
* Exemption from being drafted in military service
* Exemptions from religious duties specific to Muslims
* Exemptions from personal Muslim laws (e.g. marriage, divorce)

Obligations:

* Paying jizyah (Poll tax)
* Paying land tax

Severe and harsh restrictions were imposed on Jews in Europe before Islam came to Spain. The Visigothic Code (or Forum Judicum), has an entire book dedicated to laws concerning Jews, with severe restrictions, and often one-sided laws. King Ervigius additions to the code are even more restrictive. It forced Jews not to prevent their children from baptism, prohibited them from celebrating Passover, undergoing circumcision, marriage of relatives, observing dietary laws, reading books that the Christian faith rejects, testifying against Christians, as well as forbidding Christians from defending or protecting Jews, and forcing Jews to abstain from labor on Sundays and Christian holidays.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Dhimmi

HMMMMM ......WELL.... WHEN I FIND THIS CITING REGARDING THE KILLING OF JEWS I WILL CERTAINLY... PLACE IT... FOR NOW I AM EXTRAORDINARILY CURIOUS AS TO WHERE IT IS CITED IN THE BOOK AND WITHIN WHAT CONTEXT...

moral of this for me is. one can hardly grasp hamas doctrine out of context of history, out of context of the resistance, and with out a firm knowledge of the Koran...perhaps the quote is true to the book. I just find it odd there is no reference to specific verse.

Speaking personally, I just learned a great deal.

[Independent]

What does this mean?

But the tree of Gharqad would not say it, for it is the tree of the Jews

[Michele]

What does this mean?

your asking me... that's funny... it is on my list to figure too, because I asked the same question, particularly since it was not included by Professor Raphael Israeli in his *selected* rendition.

we will have to try and answer the question. I am quite curious about it... as i am about actually finding the quote... so if you would like to keep your eyes open for the quote that would bee good too. Between the both of us perhaps we can find it faster and then answer the MILLIONS of other questions this little excursion raised for me.

you know what I mean... could it have something to do with the burning bush? I don't know but something tells me that is a goofy long shot... my brain is melting right about now.

[Equinox]

What does this mean?

Apparantly, and I'm just inferring here, but it sounds like an apocolyptic message that there will be a call to kill Jews, however, the trees and rocks whom the Jews will hide behind, will not compromise them. I think the translation means that many will want to kill the Jews but by devine decree, the rocks and trees stand as G-d's reminder that they not be harmed.

That is of course, what I got out of it. My opinion also relies heavily upon what Michele has placed here in this thread regarding the "protected people" and the Islamic view of "people of scripture."

Provided that the "hadiths" are true and accurate, I see no reason to make any other conclusion.

As for the quote itself, MrAmerica attributes the quote to Muhammed. I have yet to see evidence that this is the case. It also appears that the quote that MrAmerica has placed to cast some kind of unfavorable light on the "Muslims" seems to be taken out of context (which I initially suspected and posted). However, the quote could be true and placed in context, I have reasonably concluded that the quote means what I have said above.

Well, so much for the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Mecca", eh?

[Michele]

Apparantly, and I'm just inferring here, but it sounds like an apocolyptic message that there will be a call to kill Jews, however, the trees and rocks whom the Jews will hide behind, will not compromise them. I think the translation means that many will want to kill the Jews but by devine decree, the rocks and trees stand as G-d's reminder that they not be harmed.

That is of course, what I got out of it. My opinion also relies heavily upon what Michele has placed here in this thread regarding the "protected people" and the Islamic view of "people of scripture."

Provided that the "hadiths" are true and accurate, I see no reason to make any other conclusion.

As for the quote itself, MrAmerica attributes the quote to Muhammed. I have yet to see evidence that this is the case. It also appears that the quote that MrAmerica has placed to cast some kind of unfavorable light on the "Muslims" seems to be taken out of context (which I initially suspected and posted). However, the quote could be true and placed in context, I have reasonably concluded that the quote means what I have said above.

Well, so much for the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Mecca", eh?


Yeah me neither... so far no evidence the quote is the word of muhamad... while it might have been cited two centuries after the prophets death, I haven't found it yet.

even before I found the stuff on the dhimmis, just based on the Hroub translation of the beginning of the quote THE FINAL HOUR; it was that which led me to believe the reference is apocolytic.

when one reads Hamas declarations over time ... and the whole of the first charter it also provides a very clear description of exactly what is being resisted. I also believe it is signficant to know that initially the group operated under the believe that the Protocols of the elders of zion were authentic which at one point.... and I will cite that as well... they abandoned that belief.

[Michele]

oh as far as true to scripture... I can not be the judge of that... look at the links... I am not sure the translation of Buhkari is necessarily the best... I will know more as I go along.... but judging from the quotes from his translation that I have read through thus far... which isn't many there is not one that refers to killing at all.... so we will see.

[Michele]

Apparantly, and I'm just inferring here, but it sounds like an apocolyptic message that there will be a call to kill Jews, however, the trees and rocks whom the Jews will hide behind, will not compromise them. I think the translation means that many will want to kill the Jews but by devine decree, the rocks and trees stand as G-d's reminder that they not be harmed.

ah see my brain is melting and I missed this interpretation of yours.... can you be clearer... are you saying that the citied quote is saying the Jews will be protected by G-d... and that the interpretation we have been conditioned with is an absolute distortion of the word.

Is that what you are thinking? As you know in reading it... again the Hroub translation... that makes sense too.

please clarify if I am undertanding you correctly.

[Equinox]

ah see my brain is melting and I missed this interpretation of yours.... can you be clearer... are you saying that the citied quote is saying the Jews will be protected by G-d... and that the interpretation we have been conditioned with is an absolute distortion of the word.

Is that what you are thinking? As you know in reading it... again the Hroub translation... that makes sense too.

please clarify if I am undertanding you correctly.

I'm saying, if the Muhammed quote is true, that he is saying that the Jews will be protected by Devine decree, hence the rocks and trees will not compromise fellow "people of scripture." It seems, to me, that Muhammed is in essence, is saying the Jews will not be harmed. Whether or not the actual quote itself is true, is still up to debate. If it is true, your previous posts regarding the Hadiths seem to support my conclusion.

[Michele]

okay... I am not sure what the bias of this paper is... or if one exists.... according to it .... the quote is definitely refering to the apocolyse... however there is no verse cited ... so I still don't know where to go to find it in context of the book

THE POLITICS OF APOCALYPSE IN THE UNDERGROUND MEDIA OF THE ISLAMIC RESISTANCE MOVEMENT (HAMAS)

A Position Paper for the Center for Millennial Studies
by
Anne-Marie Oliver and Paul Steinberg

snip

traditional Islamic eschatological scripts such as Gog and Magog, the One-Eyed Man, the Gharqad Tree, and the Hour were revitalized and politically transvalued to meet the political and psychological demands of the intifada--the Palestinian uprising which began in December 1987 and ended, arguably, with the signing of the Oslo Accords. The renaissance of these scripts was, in many ways, a natural and spontaneous movement, for what they offered was an immediate means by which the crisis then at hand could be framed, contextualized, and understood. Although they were largely presented as immutable, self-fulfilling prophecies, they were, in actuality, constantly being reinterpreted, often in creative ways.

The cluster of intifada-inspired exegeses surrounding the hadith or "tradition of the Prophet" of "the Gharqad Tree" provides a good example of such reinterpretation. The hadith, significantly, appeared early in the intifada in the 1988 mithaq or "covenant" which announced the formation of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS). Created as a Qur'an-based alternative to the nationalist groups, particularly the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the new movement, its founders hoped, would soon take the lead in the revolution then unfolding. "The seventh subject" of the document is devoted to showing that Hamas, as the militant Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, is but the latest link in the long chain of jihad waged by the Brothers against "the Zionist invasion"--a chain which includes the "'36 Revolt," a reference to the uprising directed against both the British authorities and the Palestinian Jews in 1936; the War of 1948, and the attacks and incursions following the '67 war. Clenching their argument on the necessity of war, the authors close the section with an eschatological prophecy attributed to Muhammad by the renowned collectors of ahadith, Bukhari and Muslim:

...Hamas strives for the fulfillment of God's promise as the time grows long and the Prophet, God Bless Him and Grant Him Salvation, said, "The Hour will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews (and the Muslims will kill them), until the Jews hide behind the trees and rocks and the trees and rocks will say, "O Muslim, 0 Servant of God, Here are the Jews, Come and kill them!" except the Gharqad Tree because it is a tree of the Jews."

more...

http://www.mille.org/people/steinbergoliver.html

BTW this is something I never do... I never place a link (or very rarely if every do I place a link), until I come to know it's agenda.... so I am not vouching for this information or the credibility of the context within which it is framed....

I just want to find the quote and the closed and most credible interpretation of it outside it's use by Hamas... as will as within the context of the Hamas resistance....

what I do believe is true in terms of Judeo christianity is the fundamentalist are most definitely politicalizing the apocolyse. Based on this I have no problem believing so has hamas...

[Michele]

I'm saying, if the Muhammed quote is true, that he is saying that the Jews will be protected by Devine decree, hence the rocks and trees will not compromise fellow "people of scripture." It seems, to me, that Muhammed is in essence, is saying the Jews will not be harmed. Whether or not the actual quote itself is true, is still up to debate. If it is true, your previous posts regarding the Hadiths seem to support my conclusion.

you know what I think you are correct:

As "the Hour" approaches, Muslims and Jews, according to a related hadith, will be arrayed "east and west"--directions which, not surprisingly, were reinterpreted during the intifada as references to the east and west banks of the Jordan River. The river, of course, is both the natural and legal boundary separating Jordan (east) from Israel (west). By extension, "west" also refers to the Western world, particularly America, with which Israel is allied. As in all eschatological schemas, the Forces of Light will finally prevail in a final, determinative battle. Towards this end, all of creation will turn against the Jews, even the land itself. Their only ally will be the Gharqad Tree, a thorny bush traditionally believed to speak in oracles. Some members of the Islamic Movement in the West Bank and Gaza Strip aver that the esoteric tree currently surrounds Israeli settlements as a protective hedge of natural magic. Others claim that it grows outside the Jaffa Gate of Jerusalem's Old City, the site where Jesus, according to some hadith, will one day kill the Anti-Christ. Still others ascribe a more symbolic meaning to the tree. According to one reading popular during the intifada, the Gharqad Tree represents collaborators, those Palestinians accused of cooperating with the Israeli military authorities, indeed, all the forces of the world which conspire with the Jews against the Muslims.

more...
http://www.mille.org/people/steinbergoliver.html

[Michele]

and I will not place this link I just found YET it is the translation or interpretation based upon that Christian zionist site that Mr. America found the Israeli translation....

Their interpretation which was written in 2002 gives away that they really haven't a clue what they are talking about...(and I reserve saying that as a definitive opinion right now) and I will tell you why tomorrow....

what gives them away is they completely miss a very crucial fact with regard to the evolution of Hamas polemic. So it taints the credibility of their interpretation which is therefore outdated. It might have been more relevant (to a degree) at the time the charter was written, but to hang their current interpretation on the omission of this very important fact and pass the interpretation off ... as relevant to hamas' most recent charters is very misleading... I will explain better what I mean tomorrow.

man.

In this particular "interpretation I am talking about from this Christian friends of Israel cite... they refer to a recent muslim sermon given wherein of course the portion from the sermon that they quote needs translation from Arabic... and MEMRI is credited with the translation. The interpretation of this translation is based in an inaccurate understanding however.

[MrAmerica]

1. as I mentioned this appears to be referring to end times.
2. there is no reference to koran verse
3. I am looking for the quote as if it is the word of the prophet it would be cited in the koran
Thank you Michele for summarizing your lengthy study. I credit you once again for doing your homework very diligently. I will not doubt your findings or your deductions. But here is my concern:

Whether or not the quote is a valid Muhamad quote, Koran or otherwise, the use of it by Hamas gives it weight and authority. So, what I would like to know is, who decides when the "last days" have arrived? It seems to me that with the declaration of war by extrememist groups (which are akin to Hamas) on America, Israel and the West, that they believe that the last days are here.

Also, it seems to me that if they want peace with Israel, as you say, then what they are actually saying is; "We want to live in peace with you Israel, until the last days, at which time we will kill you." It just does not have that kind of "peacey" feeling you get when you listen to John Lennon singing "All we are saying, is give peace a chance." :o

As I said, there comes a time when common sense will have to prevail, because even the scholars cannot agree with the conclusions drawn from mountains of evidence such as you have presented. In a court of law, when hundreds of documents do nothing but create more and more ambiguity, the court will look to find "intent." The intent of the parties involved will be the deciding factor in the decision, despite the fact that there may be written evidence to the contrary. So when Hamas puts into one of its charters (old or not), that Muhamad says the Arabs are to rise up and kill the Jews; Then you really have to wonder about the intent. Does it manifest itself in actions present and past? I believe it does. :cool:

[Michele]

Thank you Michele for summarizing your lengthy study. I credit you once again for doing your homework very diligently. I will not doubt your findings or your deductions. But here is my concern:

Whether or not the quote is a valid Muhamad quote, Koran or otherwise, the use of it by Hamas gives it weight and authority. So, what I would like to know is, who decides when the "last days" have arrived? It seems to me that with the declaration of war by extrememist groups (which are akin to Hamas) on America, Israel and the West, that they believe that the last days are here.

It seems to me the war was declared by the Zionists for they are forcing prophecy mind you. The land was to come to them due to obedience not due to picking up a sword and taking the land. The zionists are working against God's Promise in that they are indeed there aggressive intentions and actions are in disobedience. That Muslims killed Jews and vica versa is a time already initiated... this apparently leading us to the final hour wherein the quote seems to be referring to a time when all turn against the Jews. At that time the Jews are protected by this tree.

You make it sound as if the war was declared by the Arabs of Palestine, completely negating that fact that the act of early dispossession caused by the intent of the Zionist Endeavor was the act of aggression that began this conflict. If at any time the Zionists had maintained the agreements signed and stopped their expansion, much of which many do not see, for many refuse to grasp that the settlements are not only illegal as they continue to disppossses Palestinians they are also an aggression. When that stops the conflict ends regardless of the bravado within the rhetoric of the resistance.

So from what I can gather than. The hour of Jews and Muslims killing each other has been in swing since the late 1800's. The quote is not talking about something that is going to happen for the quote (and I cannot say how it is interpreted by Hamas themselves) is with reference to the final hours when the Jews will be protected (the time for when the Muslims kill Jews and Jews kill Muslims already set in action). Perhaps Hamas is saying they need to prevail (retake Palestine) before this hour arrives. I am not sure.

[Michele]

MR. AMERICA,

In brief, The difference between Hamas and the PLO and then Hamas and the PA AT THE TIME HAMAS FIRST AROSE.

By that time the PLO had already signed a peace agreement with Israel. Israel was already in breach of that agreement. The PLO was always in agreement with Israeli withdrawal as per R242 as was most Arab Nations, and the European community with the exception of who? Israel and the United States. And without going into the detail now, look at all the PA gave away.

Hamas was not amiable to this agreement they wished to take back Palestine. No different than Israel's wish to redeem all of Palestine. And it was this very obstinance that caused all the trouble between both Hams and the PLO and Hamas and the PA (which I will source in another post).

However, when the road map was unveiled Hamas for the first time went on record (although I have to double check the 5th charter as they might have already begun their transition) and had agreed to conform with both the PLO and the PA in agreement with the designated withdrawal of Israel as per R242. However, they stated that they would till fight their resistance as long as Israel maintain military presence in the OT's.

A momentus break with Hamas polemic mind you that got NO REAL COVERAGE IN THE US MAINSTREAM and I am not sure for that matter it was all too emphasized in the European press either.

Everytime a ceasefire was arranged who broke it?

[Michele]

Okay Mr. America I broke post #19 into two parts. In doing so post #19 is actually new as of this morning. The below post is rewritten with further clarity. Post #19 now beginnings to address your question with regard to the end times quote. I feel you may be reading it incorrectly for do you not agree that certainly at the time the quote was chosen for the first Hamas charter Jews and Muslims had already engaged in the hour whence they would kill each other. That hour arriving in the late 1800's behind the dispossession caused by the arrival of the first Zionist settlers which predates the Balfour declaration and in fact the first Arab rebellion did not occur till after another decade of dispossession ocurred. So by 1929 it was fully unveiled the Zionist intent to push the Arabs of Palestine from their land. That in my eyes is the chicken.

All up in arms about this quote about Muslims killing Jews set within an end time prophecy and the reality is Jews and Muslims had already been killing each other 100 years before Hamas even wrote their first charter . The quote is but a folly in the hands of zionist propagandists, and it negates the fact that Jews too are killing Muslims with far more impunity, and most certainly little western condemnation.



As I said, there comes a time when common sense will have to prevail, because even the scholars cannot agree with the conclusions drawn from mountains of evidence such as you have presented. In a court of law, when hundreds of documents do nothing but create more and more ambiguity, the court will look to find "intent." The intent of the parties involved will be the deciding factor in the decision, despite the fact that there may be written evidence to the contrary. So when Hamas puts into one of its charters (old or not), that Muhamad says the Arabs are to rise up and kill the Jews; Then you really have to wonder about the intent. Does it manifest itself in actions present and past? I believe it does. :cool:

Arabs rose up to kill Jews after Jews (specifically the incoming Zionist zealots) had already made clear their intent to push Arabs from Palestine.

I continue in the next post.

[Michele]

Mr. America posts 19 through to this one are all to you.



Then you really have to wonder about the intent. Does it manifest itself in actions present and past? I believe it does. :cool:

The intent of Hamas is to Resist Israeli Occupation. It is really very simple. The quote as waved round by Zionists as racist as the Tom Delay pro ethnic cleansing Christian hatemongers, is done so, out of context and as you can see in quite an ignorant fashion. It is waved round falsely to push forth the myth that Hamas is irrationally motivated by a desire to kill Jews for no reason what so ever. That is a lie. Are they a radical islamic group? Yes. Have they targeted Innocent Israeli's. Yes. But so has GOI targeted thousands more innocent Arabs. No one will even admit this let alone condemn it.

As I said, which I am not sure you have understood the groups polemic evolved with time....since the first charter it discarded the Protocols upon which the first charter was based (also discarding their belief of it), Hamas solely focusing on resistance to the Zionist intent to eventually push off all 2-3million Arabs into the desert. Which is a premeditated goal the Zionists have successfully pursued because even since 1967; who, via settlement expansion, has dispossessed who? Who has control of the important resources on this land? Who is pushing who?

This is what has and is being resisted. That is Hamas' intent as they felt both the PLO and the PA were compromising too much. (and herein lies both Hamas' weakness and their strength in terms of their motives and their intents, not their strategy). The wanted to take back the whole of Palestine. The PLO and Arafat both signed in agreement to those borders pre-1967.

However, since the roadmap was unveiled Hamas made it clear they would cease fire once Israel conformed with the agreement of withdrawal to pre-1967 borders, at the present time (as of a full year ago) outwardly expressing compromise for the first time, while our propaganda pundits who are not interested in up to date analysis let alone the truth of the matter, define Hamas by outdated terms, and outside of any of the historic truths that are not only evident but documented. So by February of last year, all groups were in agreement with withdrawal to pre-1967 borders BUT ISRAEL AND THE US. The fact of the matter is that up until last year, Hamas was fighting Israel, as well as the PLO and the PA and that is what it appears many do not understand. And in doing so also undermined the Palestinian cause, due to a number of intricate issue, the least of which being perhaps, there own blind delusion with retaking the whole of Palestine. But that in and of itself stands as testament that Hamas was the egg laid from both Zionist intent and violent action (both of which the Zionists obfuscate by distortion, omission and outright lies).

If you are unaware of the intent and refuse to see the negative actions of the chicken you can't possibly fathom the motivation of the egg.

You will have to forgive me for saying, but your fixation solely on Hamas' polemic completely negates the fact that they are a group in response to Jewish fanaticism buttressed by militant zionisms for whom it is AOKAY to kill Muslims. So you see I don't see the difference as far as righteous judgment calls is concerned.

You clearly have not taken your own time to critically analyze the polemic of Hamas with the same form of objectivity I would assume you would critically analyze the motivations of Israel's Irgun or Stern Gang within the context of Israel's struggle for independent statehood that very struggle the cause of this conflict. As unfortunate as that is. It is true. That is the way one must approach all of the groups from the PLO to Hamas. PLO was a secular group Hamas pulled in the idealogies of Islam.

It is six of these and half dozen of the other.

Jews are Killing Moslems. Or is that as inconsequential to the story as the Palestinian perspective seems to be? I don't hear anyone attempting to dissect, in as biased terms, the fundamental fanatic precepts embedded in the Talmud that makes that okay for those whom invoke those laws making Jewish racism and their killing of the other Godly.

This is what I have always been at odds with. For in my mind the utter lack of interest in analyzing this also from the Arab perspective is as one sided as my opponents insist I am. Yet I am in a position where I can look at all three religions and say.... hello they are all working off the same scripture to a degree just as they all veer from it... with the Christians insisting theirs is the true word.

ALSO it is clear to me you blur together Arafat with both Hamas and Hamas' resistance movement... that is inaccurate which I guess I must now address. Hamas loathed Arafat.... and the PA during oslo actually killed Hamas leaders and activistis with a vengence. So the real truth is Arafat was targeting the extremism of Hamas.... to say that he was not IS A LIE.

I WILL PRESENT THE MATERAIL TO BACK UP MY ASSERTION. AT ANOTHER TIME... I HAVE TO TYPE IT FROM OUT A BOOK. BUT IT IS BACKED UP BY OTHER SCHOLARS ON THE SUBJECT. SO YOU WILL HAVE TO STAY TUNED.

[Michele]

you now have several of my posts to go through ... you see I don't seek easy and patented answers.... there is nothing I can do about that.... I have had another thought also relevant to this thread as well and for this we need knowledge of Islams interpretation of prophecy....

For what do you suppose it says in the first hamas charter with regard to all people living under Islamic law?

I will come back to this point sometime soon, so think about it. For you see within the Holyland are the roots of all three religions. And the Jews could have had their temple as promised by God and peaceful existence upon this land as well, without all this bloodshed. Problem is they wished to push one people off the land, in doing so they expelled both Christian and Muslim Arabs of Palestine. Is this how God promised the land to the Jews?

[MrAmerica]

It seems to me the war was declared by the Zionists.
I am searching for information to back this up, but back in the 90's several Arab extremeist groups held a summit in Tehran and formally declared war on America, the West and "the Zionists." We basically dismissed it as hyperbole, but when 9-11-01 happened, we realized that they were quite serious. I don't recall Israel ever declaring war on the Palestinians. In fact they have been involved with negotiations with them ever since I can remember. Minachem Begin was assassinated because he did not tow the right wing line.

wherein at that time the Jews are protected by this tree.
Here's where your homework gets an "F". If the trees and rocks are "protecting" the Jews, then why do they cry out; "O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!?" Considering that you make yourself out to be so "analytical" about all of this, it seems very strange that you can take a plain sentence and twist it to mean the exact opposite of what it actually says. Equinox, if you are paying attention to this; exactly how do you think God is "protecting" the Jews by having the rocks and the trees give away their hiding places and calling for their execution? That kind of interpretation makes me feel like I am talking to people who are not grounded in reality. So I guess it's OK for the Arabs to say that the Jews will be hunted down and murdered, because they will be protected by trees? In the words of Doctor Phil; "GET REAL!"

You make it sound as if the war was declared by the Arabs of Palestine, completely negating that fact that the act of early dispossession caused by the intent of the Zionist Endeavor was the act of aggression that began this conflict.
In light of your understanding of that tree and rock text above, how am I supposed to just believe this? It's the chicken and the egg again. Once again you are justifying terrorist acts because of what Israel did previously. We have to have a zero tolerance when it comes to terrorism. There is NO justification. If Palestinians would have handled their grievances in a peaceful and effective way which would bring attention to their cause in a positive way, they would have prevailed. If you think that somehow the Jews are supposed to rely on God to save them from being murdered, than why is it impossible for the Palestinians and Arabs to rely on God to work out the issue of land possession?

If at any time the Zionists had maintained the agreements signed and stopped their expansion, much of which many do not see, for many refuse to grasp that the settlements are not only illegal as they continue to disppossses Palestinians they are also an aggression.
I agree with you on this

When that stops the conflict ends regardless of the bravado within the rhetoric of the resistance.
I disagree with you on this, and the "Muhamad" quote in the charter is proof of their intent.

[MrAmerica]

Everytime a ceasefire was arranged who broke it?
Everytime a ceasefire was arranged, I recall hereing about a suicide bomber blowing up a bus or a marketplace. Is it just the republican controled American media telling us about things that did not happen?

I am not assuming to know all things, I can only tell you what my perceptions are. But when I here about Israel taking military action, it is usually in response to something. I am sure there are exceptions, but the weight of the evidence falls in favor of Israel in my mind.

[MrAmerica]

I feel you may be reading it incorrectly for do you not agree that certainly at the time the quote was chosen for the first Hamas charter Jews and Muslims had already engaged in the hour whence they would kill each other.
Here is another homework assignment for you. Please show me where Israel ever made a written statement such as a charter, expressing the intent to engage in the killing of all Arabs.

That hour arriving in the late 1800's behind the dispossession caused by the arrival of the first Zionist settlers which predates the Balfour declaration and in fact the first Arab rebellion did not occur till after another decade of dispossession ocurred. So by 1929 it was fully unveiled the Zionist intent to push the Arabs of Palestine from their land. That in my eyes is the chicken.
If that is the chicken, then why is the Muhamad quote predate it? You question the authenticity of the quote because you do not know who Bukhari and Muslim are. So here is a reference:
"We now come to the issue of criticism of Bukhari and Muslim. Although generally, it is stated that they are authentic because the ummah has unanimously accepted them..."
http://webpages.marshall.edu/~laher1/bkhr_mslm.html


All up in arms about this quote about Muslims killing Jews set within an end time prophecy and the reality is Jews and Muslims had already been killing each other 100 years before Hamas even wrote their first charter.
Yes. Ararbs live for fulfilling the words of Muhamad, and I believe it is Muhamad's quote because of the acceptance given to Bukhari and Muslim. To say that his words are not relevant is the real folly. Prophecy is self fulfilling when it's adherants make it so.

[Michele]

I am searching for information to back this up, but back in the 90's several Arab extremeist groups held a summit in Tehran and formally declared war on America, the West and "the Zionists." I don't recall Israel ever declaring war on the Palestinians. In fact they have been involved with negotiations with them ever since I can remember. Minachem Begin was assassinated because he did not tow the right wing line.

You really don't seem to know what you are talking about!! Menachim Begin was assassinated? do you mean Rabin? Begin headed up the Freedom Party which Einstein equated with the nazi party. Begin was a head of a terrorist group. I would have to say that is about as far right as you can get. As for Israel being in negotiations with the Palestinians since as far back as you remember. Well I would have to ask you just how far back are you remembering? because it seems to me you don't have much of a memory... As it is Israel that is in breach... they are the one's who have institutionalized an illegal Military occupation. That seems to me somewhat aggressive. And it was Mofaz that declared War on the Palestinians with GOI carrying on a war against the whole of the People. Get your head out of prophecy man and join us here in reality.

I am not sure which summit you are talking about... I have heard all about a secret meeting with regard to what Arafat said regarding accepting Oslo as a temporary solution, but Arafat in fact gave the bathwater away with the baby. You see you can pull all the Zionists propaganda up all you wish. And so far you haven't disappointed me for now I will bet you are going to pull up this famous Arafat quote. I can feel it in my bones.

What I am asking you do is look at the facts on the ground now if you don't believe Israel declared war on the Arabs of palestine specifically than you are just blind.


Here's where your homework gets an "F". If the trees and rocks are "protecting" the Jews, then why do they cry out; "O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!?" Considering that you make yourself out to be so "analytical" about all of this, it seems very strange that you can take a plain sentence and twist it to mean the exact opposite of what it actually says. Equinox, if you are paying attention to this; exactly how do you think God is "protecting" the Jews by having the rocks and the trees give away their hiding places and calling for their execution?


You are the one that is said to be the theologian not I. I am just working from logic. Have the Jews and Muslim not been killing each other since the early 1900's. I don't know where you are looking for your reality, but it seems to me they have. Ultimately, it seems to me the quote leads us to the time when this Tree protects the Jews. If you reread the full article there is mention of urgency.

personally, I am not as concerned about prophecy. The fact remains that Hamas did not form for the express purpose to kill Jews. The Formed to fight the Zionists war declared on all Palestinians. You speak of reality and then you negate much of it.


That kind of interpretation makes me feel like I am talking to people who are not grounded in reality. So I guess it's OK for the Arabs to say that the Jews will be hunted down and murdered, because they will be protected by trees? In the words of Doctor Phil; "GET REAL!"


Again you have the chicken and the egg mixed up. You can't seem to get the Zionists were the ones who declared war. Hamas had nothing to do with 9/11. And who in great numbers are being killed? But you are concerned with a quote that invoked to inspire resistance against the Zionist murder of Palestinians? Quite frankly considering you don't wish to deal in many of these facts, for one you inaccurately insist Arafat and Hamas are in collusion when that is wrong. You have know working knowledge of the conflict, let alone the resistance. And you now scream about reality. Seems to me since you seem to be incapable of distinguishing fact from fiction, and even when corrected continue to push forth your erroneous onesided premise so little of it based in fact.

It remains to be seen what the meaning of that quote is. As it is I am not sure muhamad utter those words... yet you seemed to be sure of that when first we addressed the subject. Talking to yo uis like an exercise in coddling someone suffering from delusion. You haven't demonstrated any interest in facts, dot for dot you follow what so far is myth's handed you by the zioinst propagandists you follow... and it seems to me these zionists you are following are christians.... who you pointed out in the other thread have a bone to pick with the Jews.... in regard to all these laws Jews added moving the Jews away from their own history.... so what now are you an "authority" on Jewish history via your knowledge of Christianity.

Tell me what is the topic for which you actually possess any knowledge, because with each additional post... I can't see I have detected much knowledge. But go ahead find that "info" regarding that secret summit in which Arafat made that famous quote the zionists just love to wave aorund like Hamas first charter without an iota of curiosity to actually read the charter within the context of history it was written.

I suggest you look for that information on frontpagemagazine.com. Might be the fasted way for you to find it. Although it seems to me that Christian friends of Israel site might house that particular summit as well.



so not only can't you follow palestinian history, of which you clearly have no knowledge of ... as a christian it seems you feel the Jews have strayed from their history as well. And you scream about reality.

More and more you are coming in real clear to me. real clear indeed.

[Michele]

If that is the chicken, then why is the Muhamad quote predate it? You question the authenticity of the quote because you do not know who Bukhari and Muslim are. So here is a reference:
"We now come to the issue of criticism of Bukhari and Muslim. Although generally, it is stated that they are authentic because the ummah has unanimously accepted them..."
http://webpages.marshall.edu/~laher1/bkhr_mslm.html



the quote reference end times... you haven't actually been following my argument nor are you concerned with any of the facts pertinent to the conflict itself. Well you enlightenment me please as to what this website is suppose to be telling me...

I provided a link directly to the book of Bukhari, what the hell does this link you place have to do with the quote specifically and who is making the interpretation. did you see the interpretation of the quote I placed from the millen.org ... it specifically addresses the fact that the quote deals with prophecy...

I suggest before you spend all your time spewing forth superficially misunderstood comments regarding important issues that you first pull together for yourself a real working knowledge of the conflct on the ground, because you definitely do not have it... and the place from wihch you are coming is disrespectful and insulting in terms of just the academic study of history... you seem to have no real respect for that... you are so easily being led by the nose.

You haven't even offered what I would call any astute or thoughtful comments or summaries regarding end times or prophecy...not even from a christian standpoint whether conservative or fanatic and rabidly antiSemitic. you thus far have not expressed any knowledge that the christians fully intend to kill the Jews that do not convert after the holyland is recovered by the christians...as per various christian interpretations of the prophecy...

I hate this ****ing prophecy... it is a suicide cult to out death them all. It has so little to do with either god's word or the teachings of christ it makes my stomack turn. And believe me you are not presenting it in terms that would Christianity so proud either. I would dare not spew forth so disrespectfully without consulting rabbi's and priests of scholarship as well as muslim cleric with regard to muhamad... how would you like it if people started blaspheming Jesus christ or the messiah whoever he is?

yet you fixate on a quote that we actually haven't found within text... unless it is in this other link you have here.... but who in this link is interpreting the information. That is very important.... for you can take what seems to be a fear of Arabs somewhere else. I want the Islamic interpretatoin of this quote not just some half assed gobbldigook, before I would base my any whole argument on a quote found in the hamas charter... especially if I haven't eve read the full charter myself and have no knowledge of the politics within which the group arose.

You are trying my patience again. The way you choose to approach this is insults me. I must tell you that. It is almost hysterical.

Oh now I can't wait to find the stuff on the summit... have you any clue of the things that have transformed and changed since the Hamas charter ws written in 1988....NO.... you are stuck in some kind of propaganda lockdown.

this is counter productive....especially since you are clueless with regard to the harm the Zionist endeavor caused let alone the malicious nature of their intent...

you wish to completely smear muhamad based on spec. How very insulting. And you wonder why Arab extremists are angry to boot.

[MrAmerica]

The intent of Hamas is to Resist Israeli Occupation.
How does the killing of women and children in areas where they have a right to be resist the occupation?

the myth that Hamas is irrationally motivated by a desire to kill Jews for no reason what so ever. [b]That is a lie. Are they a radical islamic group? Yes. Have they targeted Innocent Israeli's. Yes.
So you admit that they are a radical group that targets innocent people, but you cling to the notion that they have no desire to do so, and the belief that they do is a myth? Come on Michele. You are trying to make lemonade out of apples.

But so has GOI targeted thousands more innocent Arabs. No one will even admit this let alone condemn it.
The recent actions of Israel have been condemned. In fact many people think that Bush is a hypocrite because he is telling Israel to exercise restraint when he is conducting a pre-emptive war. You compare Israel's actions with those of suicide bombers. But most people don't see it that way.

However, since the roadmap was unveiled Hamas made it clear they would cease fire once Israel conformed with the agreement of withdrawal to pre-1967 borders,
The agreement on the boarders could not be worked out without a ceasefire. You cannot negotiate peace without a ceasefire. Here is a little fact for you: "The fledgling road map to Middle East peace was put to a bloody test Wednesday, when a Hamas suicide bomber blew up a bus in Jerusalem and Israeli forces (in response) attacked Hamas militants in Gaza, leaving more than two dozen people dead and 100 others wounded." http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/06/11/mideast/

You clearly have not taken your own time to critically analyze the polemic of Hamas with the same form of objectivity
Michele, I am spending all of my time responding to your endless and lengthy posts. I really have to tell you that I don't have time for this. I am more than happy to debate with you, but we are going to have to keep it simple. Please don't just keep posting more and more before I even get a chance to respond to previous posts. My weekends belong to my family, and this is really cutting into my weekdays.

I would assume you would critically analyze the motivations of Israel's Irgun or Stern Gang within the context of Israel's struggle for independent statehood that very struggle the cause of this conflict.
Here is a good example of bringing more to the table than needs to be addressed. I am unfamiliar with Irgun or Stern, and I really am not going to make a career out of absorbing all of this information right now. I believe in "K.I.S.S.ing" (Keep it simple stupid). I am not calling you stupid, it is a figure of speech.

[b]Jews are Killing Moslems. Or is that as inconsequential to the story as the Palestinian perspective seems to be?
While this is true, it is indirectly related to the Palestinians lack of a state, and their refugee status. I think that their own leaders could have remedied this situation instead of clinging uncompromisingly to their demands. Israel is not intentionally going into Palestinian areas with purpose of murdering them, in the way Hamas and the bombers are.

Yet I am in a position where I can look at all three religions and say.... hello they are all working off the same scripture to a degree just as they all veer from it... with the Christians insisting theirs is the true word.
Michele, you are really testing my patience now. The battle cry for Muslims everywhere is "There is no other God but Allah." In fact a Muslim Mosque just won the right in a Michigan court to broadcast that "fact" over load speakers 5 times a day in a neighborhood where Christians have to listen to it. Can you imagine the outcry if Christians tried to broadcast something like that here in America, let alone in a Muslim nation?

[Michele]

you haven't a clue. you really believe the break in ceasefires were caused by Hamas. That is total bunk. You are following mainstream news and that is the problem. I already placed one account of who it is always breaks the ceasefires and it is not Hamas. You never even acknowledge having read the information. Even Israeli historians refute your understanding... Israel is the one that breaks ceasefire. the Hudna from last year they were never even in compliance with.

Sorry you really don't know what you are talking about. when you can annouce to this forum that Menachim Begin was assassinated because he didn't tow the far right line. You clearly haven't a clue.

who has consistently thumbed there nose up at peace? Israel and the US:


In a crucial shift beginning under the Nixon-Kissinger administration, however, American policy was realigned with Israel's. (33) Except for Israel and the United States (and occasionally a US client state), the international community has consistently supported, for the past quarter-century, the "two-state" settlement: that is, the full Israeli withdrawal/full Arab recognition formula as well as the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. The United States cast the lone veto of Security Council resolutions in January 1976 and April 1980 affirming the two-state settlement that were endorsed by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and neighboring Arab states. A December 1989 General Assembly resolution along similar lines passed 151-3 (no abstentions), the three negative votes cast by Israel, the United States, and Dominica. (34) Given this record of contempt for world opinion, it's unsurprising that Israel set as a crucial precondition for negotiations that Palestinians "must drop their traditional demand" for "international arbitration" or a "Security Council mechanism." (35) The main obstacle to Israel's annexation of occupied Palestinian territory was the PLO. Having endorsed the two-state settlement in the mid-1970s, it could no longer be dismissed as simply a terrorist organization bent on Israel's destruction. Indeed, pressures mounted on Israel to reach an agreement with the PLO's "compromising approach." Consequently in June 1982 Israel invaded Lebanon, where Palestinian leaders were headquartered, to head off what Israeli strategic analyst Avner Yaniv dubbed the PLO's "peace offensive." (36)

WHO CONSISTENTLY BROKE CEASEFIRE EVEN AS THE EXTREMIST WERE WORKING ONE OUT AND MANY TIMES MORE THAN ONCE? ISRAEL



In July 2002, Israel moved quickly to avert yet another political catastrophe. With assistance from European diplomats, militant Palestinian organizations, including Hamas, reached an accord to suspend all attacks inside Israel, perhaps paving the way for a return to the negotiating table. Just 90 minutes before it was to be announced, however, Israeli leaders - fully apprised of the imminent declaration - ordered an F-16 to drop a one-ton bomb on a densely-populated civilian neighborhood in Gaza, killing, alongside a Hamas leader, 11 children and five others, and injuring 140. Predictably, the declaration was scrapped and Palestinian terrorist attacks resumed with a vengeance. "What is the wisdom here?" a Meretz party leader asked the Knesset. "At the very moment that it appeared that we were on the brink of a chance for reaching something of a cease-fire, or diplomatic activity, we always go back to this experience - just when there is a period of calm, we liquidate." Yet, having headed off another dastardly Palestinian "peace offensive," the murderous assault made perfect sense. Small wonder Sharon hailed it as "one of our greatest successes." (52) Scoring still another major political victory the next month, the Israeli government blocked Israeli peace activists from linking up with 700 of their Palestinian counterparts in Bethlehem. Reporting from Bethlehem, Amira Hass observed that many Palestinians were endeavoring to "open a pubic debate aimed at reducing Palestinian support for attacks inside Israel, without waiting for a change in Israeli policy." The joint demonstration, she continued, "was an example of that type of effort. It was an effort that failed, foiled by the Israeli authorities." (53)

THE ABOVE WAS ALWAYS ISRAEL'S ANSWER TO PEACE. CHECK THE SOURCES IN THE ABOVE ARTICLE. YOU ARE FOLLOWING US PROPAGANDA BECAUSE WE ARE THE ULTIMATE OBSTACLE TO PEACE BETWEEN ISRAELI AND PALESTINIAN. NOT HAMAS. NOT ARAFAT HE BUT A LACKEY.

http://www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node.php?id=734.

AS FOR THIS BUHKARI AND MUSLIM QUOTE YOU WANT TO FORWARD YOUR ARGUEMENT YOU FIND THAT EXACT QUOTE IN A CREDIBLE ISLAMIC TEXT WITH A CREDIBLE INTERPRETATION... AND I DO MEAN THE EXACT QUOTE FROM WITHIN CREDIBLE ISLAMIC TEXT IN CONTEXT... AND YOU WILL PUL IT OUT AND MAKE IT VERY CLEAR WHERE IN TEXT IT IS. ALONG WITH CREDIBLE INTERPRETATION.

UNTIL THAT TIME THERE IS NO POINT IN DISCUSSING IT.

[MrAmerica]

Menachim Begin was assassinated? do you mean Rabin?
Yes, my mistake again. I am writing quickly to keep up with your barage of posts. Sorry.

I am not sure which summit you are talking about...
Al-Qaeda was there, and I believe Hamas and Hizbollah were as well. I am searching for the info. But it was on the news after 911.

if you don't believe Israel declared war on the Arabs of palestine specifically than you are just blind.
There is no evidence for that other than your deductive reasoning. Even if they did formally declare war, Palestinians have no justification for killing women and children.

Ultimately, it seems to me the quote leads us to the time when this Tree protects the Jews.
Since when has a tree done anything but be a tree? A tree does not "DO" anything. Niether does a rock. But people who are trying to kill others "DO" something.

If you reread the full article there is mention of urgency.
I would think so.

personally, I am not as concerned about prophecy.
Obviously Hamas is.

The fact remains that Hamas did not form for the express purpose to kill Jews.
Then why is that quote a part of their charter. Why does it describe the end result of their purpose?

in regard to all these laws Jews added moving the Jews away from their own history.... so what now are you an "authority" on Jewish history via your knowledge of Christianity.
The Talmud/Mishna/Gemara were added centuries after the Torah. It's not a big secret.

I'm not going to go around and around with you on this. You see yourself as a self appointed authority, and you think your knowledge supercede's all common sense. You justify anything that threatens your defense of Palestinians, and then you call yourself unbiased. Maybe I'll give you a break, so that you don't have to do all of this "work" for my benefit. I certainly could use some free time.

[Michele]

And in addition to post #31



Michele, you are really testing my patience now. The battle cry for Muslims everywhere is "There is no other God but Allah." In fact a Muslim Mosque just won the right in a Michigan court to broadcast that "fact" over load speakers 5 times a day in a neighborhood where Christians have to listen to it. Can you imagine the outcry if Christians tried to broadcast something like that here in America, let alone in a Muslim nation?

FOR MUSLIMS EVERYWHERE? AND WHAT WAS OUR BATTLE CRY? You are not one to be talking about muslims of this I am more than certain.

and what about the jehovah witnesses... do they not insist there is only one god and his name is Jehovah so what? they all have possessio of this one god it makes me sick.

And the jews have their messiah don't even really concern themselves much with the son and the christians have the final word on the matter.

but you have a thing with all the muslims in the world. and yet I guess have never considered that from the Arab perspective american's aren't coming across real friendly and they haven't been for quite some time. Should they lump us all together as one? I would guess you don't think they should. And most likely they don't, yet you in all your "knowledge" or lack thereof, make another wholly disrepectful statement just from the perspective of humanity... all the muslims everywhere!! that just sums it up.

And I suppose you call yourself a Christian.

[MrAmerica]

but you have a thing with all the muslims in the world. and yet I guess have never considered that from the Arab perspective american's aren't coming across real friendly and they haven't been for quite some time. Should they lump us all together as one? I would guess you don't think they should. And most likely they don't, yet you in all your "knowledge" or lack thereof, make another wholly disrepectful statement just from the perspective of humanity... all the muslims everywhere!! that just sums it up.

As I said in a previous post; I find it extremely interesting that leftists and liberals like you, who are so down on the Christians, are so quick to run to the defense of the most intolerant and oppressive religion in the world.

I do not believe the I am being unchristian by calling the Muslim religion intolerant. I am not applying that to all Mulim individuals, but the religion as a whole is the reason why Saudi Arabia has "religious police," who patrol the streets looking for "immoral behavior." It is also the reason why Salmon Rushdi had a death sentence pronounced upon him for speaking out. It is also the reson why in many countries women are denied education and the right to go out in public alone. It is the reason why people are imprisoned for doing things that are acceptable in other countries.

[Michele]

Yes, my mistake again. I am writing quickly to keep up with your barage of posts. Sorry.

hey you either know the history or not. Your mix up between menachim begin and rabin is so telling you truly don't know. Tell me what was the party line on Begin.


Al-Qaeda was there, and I believe Hamas and Hizbollah were as well. I am searching for the info. But it was on the news after 911.

Oh I am sure it was.


There is no evidence for that other than your deductive reasoning. Even if they did formally declare war, Palestinians have no justification for killing women and children.

there is tons of evidence of it who dares care whether it was formal or not. the Zionists work from denial and deception. Their lexicon is a virtual study in delusion and fantasy. It wasn't until last year that Likud even admitted there was an Occupation. The whole zionist endeavor was an act of war, whether formally declared or not. and there is mountains of evidence to support they are the aggressors generally striking pre-emptively. I provided you another link above... I guess you missed that...

Hey I have an idea why don't you call Menachim the dove!

It has little to do with deductive reasoning... this current war being conducted by Israel, it is outlined in the Israeli General's plan picked up by Jane's foreign report. You are lost in a world of distortion. You aren't even applying any deductive reasoning of your own.


Since when has a tree done anything but be a tree? A tree does not "DO" anything. Niether does a rock. But people who are trying to kill others "DO" something.



There is traditional Islamic script that has to do with the Gharqad Tree, unfortunately when one places a search for the text one comes up with the distortions the likes of memri... One needs to consult the script directly... or does one just all of a sudden forget how research is done when it comes to Islamic script and just decide to make it up based on prompts from the zionist right?

AS FOR THIS BUHKARI AND MUSLIM QUOTE YOU WANT TO FORWARD YOUR ARGUEMENT YOU FIND THAT EXACT QUOTE IN A CREDIBLE ISLAMIC TEXT WITH A CREDIBLE INTERPRETATION... AND I DO MEAN THE EXACT QUOTE FROM WITHIN CREDIBLE ISLAMIC TEXT IN CONTEXT... AND YOU WILL PULL IT OUT AND MAKE IT VERY CLEAR WHERE IN TEXT IT IS. ALONG WITH CREDIBLE INTERPRETATION.

UNTIL THAT TIME THERE IS NO POINT IN DISCUSSING IT.



Obviously Hamas is.


Have you read the full charter. I can't say you are in a position to state much of anything about Hamas. You weren't even aware they even had a charter. You believe Arafat and Hamas work together do to their declaration of war on Israel this peaceful democracy... which in the other thread I provide not deductive reasoning but more facts to contest your incorrect conclusion. Israel is a racist state backed up by racists land laws, practicing institutionalized Jim Crow. You can't purchase land unless you are purely Jewish.


The Talmud/Mishna/Gemara were added centuries after the Torah. It's not a big secret.

who said it was a big secret. I just said within the talmud exists halachic laws which can be invoked making it legal to kill Goyim. I guess that is alright with you... and I am the one who is biased... I guess it is alright to invoke laws from centuries ago... to kill Goyim... but those Goyim being killed dare they protest.


I'm not going to go around and around with you on this.

You can barely keep up with me on this you haven't presented any real facts yet.



You see yourself as a self appointed authority, and you think your knowledge supercede's all common sense.

Knowledge breeds common sense. The propaganda you are waving around breeds NONSENSE. And I never appointed myself as anything. Though posters here have certainly anointed me with many titles.



You justify anything that threatens your defense of Palestinians, and then you call yourself unbiased.

I am merely reconciling the record. And seeing as you don't really know the history. You are only following the Us and israeli and christian zionist perspective. YET YOU SCREAM ABOUT EVERY MUSLIM IN THE WORD.

What is this you say about bias?



Maybe I'll give you a break, so that you don't have to do all of this "work" for my benefit. I certainly could use some free time.

cop out! How interesting you resort to a form of condescencion rather than forward our argument by way of factual data. Do you really believe I am doing this for you. Hah! That is funny. Clearly I am not because you believe you know what you are talking about. I think you might utilize more of your time learning the facts... and at that time perhaps you might give me a break.... at this time...

there really isn't much to more to discuss. The reason for this is quite obvious. I at a later time will transcribe the rest of the 5th Charter that was drawn up for the summit in cairo in 1996 and place pertinient information on the relations between Hamas and the PLO and hamas and the PA, in an effort to address the mess you made of the facts concerning Arafat.

Just as aside I wonder where Blueactive went for you are beginning to sound like a relative of he.

[Michele]

deleted by author as post is duplicated below

[Michele]

As I said in a previous post; I find it extremely interesting that leftists and liberals like you, who are so down on the Christians, are so quick to run to the defense of the most intolerant and oppressive religion in the world.



oh well this is just further proof you haven't an argument, along with your lack of command of any of the facts, you have now resorted to the old leftist liberal meme. to say nothing of the fact that your statement borders on bigotry of your own. Let me take than this opportunity to repost this as it is based not on deduction but FACTS OF THE MATTER... and of course I added to it a bit after I originally posted. the part in red is the area which has been rewritten:


Then why is that quote a part of their charter. Why does it describe the end result of their purpose?

Hamas purpose has changed over the years. Initially it was to retake Palestine... which would require killing their enemy who happen to be Jews who are their Occupiers, who had already killed thousands of Arabs. Hamas rejected the Peace processes especially Oslo. It was the sham of Oslo and the savagery of Netanyhu's governing, which resulted in more dispossession as settlements continued to expand, that moved Hamas from a passive form of resistance to military action leading them to their campaign of terror which Arafat most certainly did police and quite violently.

A fact, those all pushing forth purely pro israel propaganda do not wish to address: THAT ARAFAT WAS CRACKING DOWN ON MILITANTS AND ANYONE WHO WAS IN DISSENT OF OSLO INCLUDING INTELLECTUALS. This is not justification this is just a matter of fact. Once the roadmap was unveiled Hamas' purpose and their desired result changed. So you are holding them to a quote in a charter that is a decade old. This is why your premise is inaccurate and your conclusions are worthlessly distorted.

It has already been established that the quote references end times. THAT IS what I am trying to figure out... but I need to know more about islam to interpret it correctly rather than to jump to conclusions. on top of which then one needs to understand the context from which Hamas is coming. For that I will see if Hroub addresses this very quote and if so, let you know, if not the true purpose for its use in the charter, at least a balanced an informed deduction by an author (and an Arab, I am not sure if he is a Muslim) who has a much greater handle on the history than either of us.

The fact remains that Jews and muslims have been killing each other now since the Zionists began immigrating and their project was placed underway. We don't need sources to substantiate that just our eyes. Which is why I choose not to interpret the quote literally. For the killing has already started. You haven't actually grasped many of the nuiances in terms of what was teh premise that served the first charter vs that very premise being discarded. The understanding of this is also required. But hey... you know this like the inside of a banana... afterall in your haste it seems Menachim Begin was assassinated because he was a Dove...

:laughter: Thanks for the laugh!

[MrAmerica]

It has already been established that the quote references end times. THAT IS what I am trying to figure out... but I need to know more about islam to interpret it correctly rather than to jump to conclusions.
And if the quote refers to end times, it can be logically understood to mean that it is not dependent upon anything that happens before that, including anything Israel does.

But you go ahead and analyze, dissect and interpret it. You obviously enjoy doing all of that. Eventually I'm sure you will come to some conclusion that fits your agenda.

[Michele]

And if the quote refers to end times, it can be logically understood to mean that it is not dependent upon anything that happens before that, including anything Israel does.

But you go ahead and analyze, dissect and interpret it. You obviously enjoy doing all of that. Eventually I'm sure you will come to some conclusion that fits your agenda.

My agenda is sorting out the propaganda, particularly that which obfuscates the truth. like this conclusion of yours rests in facts, to only name one of the many factual distortions you are working from:


who are so down on the Christians, are so quick to run to the defense of the most intolerant and oppressive religion in the world.

Islam is the most intolerant and oppressive religion in the world!! really? And I am the one with the agenda? Do you really believe these radical islamists represent all the muslims in all of the world?

like I said you are crossing over a line into bigoted territory there. While you justify and excuse the barbarism and oppressive cruelty of the State of Israel based on evidence of no frame of reference of your own and block from your mind the audacious repressive nature of radical christianity who wish to administer laws based on a morality of their choosing.

In the meantime who is down on Christians? That fundamentalism is not wholly representative either, I just raise it to point out all three religions possess their own forms of hatred and exclusivities, you wish to excuse the Jews and the Christians. How interesting seeing as that barbarity effects the muslims there by illiciting a negative response. You either are not reading my posts or fail to understand how to comprehend them.

How convenient for the most rabid fundamentalists who truly loathe each other to get in bed with each other in an effort to vilify the Muslims and Islam.

whatever.

[Michele]

and in the meantime you never did address that question I had about what this issue was with christian conversion? Why must the Christians convert the world? What is that all about?

I guess when the time comes for the Christians to kill the Jews who don't wish to convert that can be justified. Because what was it again you said: the Jews have veered from the book. So if end times should arrive is that how the Christians intend to justify their butchery all in the name of rapture? hmmm.

Is there a reason you don't wish to address this part of christian prohecy? or did you address it in the other thread?

[logic85]

Michele by the way you are right about the Talmud, there are extremely racist laws in there, and I say this as a Jew - so I am in the best position to know this. For example, it often states that stealing of a goy is acceptable, and that the blood of a jew and a a goy is not the same thing - a jew is more important. You can break Shabbat to save the life of a Jew but not a non-Jew.

And by the way, Jews believe that the Talmud was given by God, so MrAmerica look up on your facts. Not that I believe in any religion, it's all crap.

[Michele]

oh yeah! and continuing === I guess by that time the Christians will be telling the world just how vile the Jews really are because uh they strayed from the book? Is that it?

really Mr. America you implied you were very savvy with regard to Christian scripture and prophecy. Why in the world haven't you addressed this particular part of the end time story?

Why do you instead insistant upon attempting to discuss prophesy from the Islamic perspective when it is clear you know absolutely nothing about Islam?

Perhaps this is why you can't see your own bias. Though I infer.

[Michele]

Michele by the way you are right about the Talmud, there are extremely racist laws in there, and I say this as a Jew - so I am in the best position to know this. For example, it often states that stealing of a goy is acceptable, and that the blood of a jew and a a goy is not the same thing - a jew is more important. You can break Shabbat to save the life of a Jew but not a non-Jew.

And by the way, Jews believe that the Talmud was given by God, so MrAmerica look up on your facts. Not that I believe in any religion, it's all crap.

I am glad you showed up can you tell me why Mr. America will not address that vile part of Christian prophesy regarding their need to convert the Jews?

I was wondering if anyone was following this particular bit of farce in this thread.

Have you any idea why the Christians are so obsessed with converting the world, logic85? Why is that part of prophecy is not readily discussed by our christian zionist posters so ready to demonize the whole of the Muslim people. Are they ashamed of that part of their own interpretation of prophecy do you think?

BTW. I am with you on your disgust with religion. It has got to be the most useless debate going who's god is the most truest of them all at the utter desicration of the holyland. It is all but more righteous justification, breed of some defense mechanism gone completely awry.

[Michele]

Michele by the way you are right about the Talmud, there are extremely racist laws in there, and I say this as a Jew - so I am in the best position to know this. For example, it often states that stealing of a goy is acceptable, and that the blood of a jew and a a goy is not the same thing - a jew is more important. You can break Shabbat to save the life of a Jew but not a non-Jew.

Yes these were the laws to which I refer. I had no knowledge of this in the Talmud most of the Jews I know are secular... I live in a Jewish (israeli) neighborhood very religious and I must tell you truth the men are the ones that go to study and if they pass you on the street they don't even acknowledge your presence, perhaps this is because I am a woman, but I must tell you that at times I have gotten the feeling form the way some will kind of shrug back away from me that I have a disease they don't want to catch... all in all it kind of cracks me up.

When I use to shop in the neighborhood more readily, the men would be flirtation (these not the religions guys) but before even talking to me all ask are you Jewish, cause I look sephardic.

One day I could see one of the hassidim a man... on my block he looked lost and somewhat hassled we were in close proximity of one another... this was before I knew of these laws you mention... I offered to help him... asking if he needed directions... truly though I was right there in front of him he looked startled to hear me speak... and backed away subtly.... in a moments pause I asked again if I could help him...

and looking at me with a kind of well .... I am not sure what the expression was ... he asks me, "Are you Jewish?" Inside I rolled my eyes somewhat amused to myself informing him that no I wasn't Jewish but I would help him anyway. Which is pretty much verbetim what I said... explaining you seem as if lost so I thought you might need directions.... FINALLY... he understood... as it was a kind of confusion I guess that he was coping with in this moment (who knew he thought me an abomination).... I am laughing...

anyway he asked if I could direct him to a phone booth... which I did.

I learned of the talmudic influences from reading the book, "Jewish Ideology Jewish History: The Weight of 3000 Year," by Israel Shahak. He has another one I am getting ready to read entitled, "Jewish Fundamentalism" I read already chapter six of this book. It expresses in great detail what transpired between the wackos in the settlements and the Israeli Government after Baruch Goldstein openned fire on that Mosque in Hebron. Did you know Goldstein who I believe is from brooklyn (though don't quote me on that) invoked the halacha when a medic during the lebanon war refusing to administer medical aid to non-Jews... the Military knew of this and he was not court martialed.

anyway it was reading shahak's book at the beginning of this year when I was introduced to these somewhat anti-social precepts of the strict orthodox. Shahak shows in his second book that this fundamentalism has more of an influence political (in Israel) than most are aware.

an article:

Pursuing the Millennium
Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040216&s=hirst

One of the shahak books... chapter six is the chapter on baruch goldstein

http://www.geocities.com/alabasters_archive/jewish_fundamentalism.html

damn I just placed a link to a site where you can download the whole book which I meant to do and now I can't find the site.

[Michele]

my apologies for the excess but this article is worth posting more than just the link, as it is it is crystal clear much of the factual stuff posted many of my opponents do not bother to read.... so let me post more of the article I placed above from the Nation, for I agree with Shahak and believe this too should be placed as critically under the microscope:

Pursuing the Millennium
Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel
by David Hirst

This essay is excerpted from David Hirst's The Gun and the Olive Branch, recently re-released by Nation Books.


I n the minds of many Westerners, Muslim fundamentalism has replaced communism as perhaps the greatest single "threat" to the existing world order. From this perspective the Palestinian intifada becomes just another episode in a "clash of civilizations." For them, there is an intrinsic link between Palestinian "terrorism" and, say, the al-Qaeda bombing of an American warship off Yemen. Almost totally absent from such arguments is any inclination to examine Jewish fundamentalism, or so much as to ask whether it, too, might be a factor in the conflict over Palestine, one of the reasons why it seems so insoluble.

There is, in fact, a great ignorance of, or indifference to, this whole subject in the outside world, and not least in the United States. This is due at least in part to that general reluctance of the mainstream American media to subject Israel to the same searching scrutiny to which it would other states and societies, and especially when the issue in question is as sensitive, as emotionally charged, as this one is. But, in the view of the late Israel Shahak, it reflects particularly badly on an American Jewry which, with its ingrained, institutionalized aversion to finding fault with Israel, turns a blind eye to what Israelis like himself viewed with disgust and alarm, and unceasingly said so.

American Jews, especially Orthodox ones, are generous financiers of the shock troops of fundamentalism, the religious settlers; indeed a good 10 percent of these, and among the most extreme, violent and sometimes patently deranged, are actually immigrants from America. They are, says Shahak, one of the "absolutely worst phenomena" in Israeli society, and "it is not by chance that they have their roots in the American-Jewish community." It was from his headquarters in New York that the Lubavitcher Rebbe, the late Menachem Schneerson, seer of possibly the most rabid of Hasidic sects, the Chabad, gave guidance to his many followers in both Israel and the United States.

The ignorance or indifference is all the more remiss in that Jewish fundamentalism is not, and cannot be, just a domestic Israeli question. Israel was always a highly ideological society; it is also a vastly outsized military power, both nuclear and conventional. That is a combination which, when the ideology in question is Zionism in its most extreme, theocratic form, is fraught with possible consequences for the region and the world, and, of course, for the world's only, Israeli-supporting superpower.

more...

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040216&s=hirst

[MrAmerica]

and in the meantime you never did address that question I had about what this issue was with christian conversion? Why must the Christians convert the world? What is that all about?
See the "Humane treatment" thread, post #207.

I guess when the time comes for the Christians to kill the Jews who don't wish to convert that can be justified....So if end times should arrive is that how the Christians intend to justify their butchery all in the name of rapture? hmmm.
And you accuse me of being biggoted not knowing what I'm talking about! :mad:
Please show me where Christians are told to kill Jews. You won't find it in the bible, and any extra-biblical injunction to do so can not be considered "Christian."

Is there a reason you don't wish to address this part of christian prohecy? or did you address it in the other thread?
I am more than happy to discuss this "prophecy," because there is none. Nothing of the sort exists. Show me what you are referring to.

[MrAmerica]

Michele by the way you are right about the Talmud, there are extremely racist laws in there, and I say this as a Jew - so I am in the best position to know this. For example, it often states that stealing of a goy is acceptable, and that the blood of a jew and a a goy is not the same thing - a jew is more important. You can break Shabbat to save the life of a Jew but not a non-Jew.
This is what I meant by additional rules and stipulations.

And by the way, Jews believe that the Talmud was given by God, so MrAmerica look up on your facts. Not that I believe in any religion, it's all crap.
For someone who thinks all religion is crap, you certainly think you are qualified to comment on it.

The Talmud is not equal to scripture, any more than the Catholic Catechism is equal to the bible. The Talmud is the Jewish theologians attempts to interpret scripture and apply it to everyday life. There is nothing in scripture about "the stealing of a goy." Scripture says nothing about the blood of a Jew being different than the blood of a "goy." In fact Scripture allowed for gentiles to become Israelites. Rahab, a gentile harlot became the great grandmother of King David. And as for Shabbat; Scripture says that after God created the world He blessed the 7th Day. The Sabbath was instituted before there ever was a Jew.

God is credited with the giving of the scriptures, He did not give the commentary. As a Jew, you prove my point that your religious leaders place more importance on the man-made commentary, than on the scripture itself.

[Michele]

See the "Humane treatment" thread, post #207.


And you accuse me of being biggoted not knowing what I'm talking about! :mad:
Please show me where Christians are told to kill Jews. You won't find it in the bible, and any extra-biblical injunction to do so can not be considered "Christian."


I am more than happy to discuss this "prophecy," because there is none. Nothing of the sort exists. Show me what you are referring to.

come on you have got to be kidding me? the evangelical rapturists are rooting for the Jews to take the holyland at which point the christians are to gain dominion wherein they will attempt to convert the Jews to christianity if they don't convert they will be killed....

snip
Their postmillennialism rested in part on their belief that God will convert the Jews to Christianity as a prelude to the kingdom’s period of greatest expansion, an idea derived from Paul’s Epistle to the church at Rome, chapter 11. Presbyterians are officially commanded to pray for the conversion of the Jews. [Westminster Larger Catechism (1647), Answer 191.]


Fundamentalists earlier in this century were sometimes associated with anti-Semitism. James M. Gray of the Moody Bible Institute in 1927 wrote an editorial favorable to Henry Ford’s Dearborn Independent series on Jews. Gray’s editorial appeared in the Moody Bible Institute Monthly. Arno C. Gabelein, a prominent fundamentalist leader, believed that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion was a legitimate document. Gabelein’s 1933 book, The Conflict of the Ages, would today be regarded as anti-Semitic.

snip

Basic to the view of both premillennialism and amillennialism is pessimism regarding the efforts of Christians to build a culture-wide kingdom of God on earth. Both positions hold that only by Jesus’ bodily presence among the saints can Christians create an cultural alternative to the competing kingdoms of man. The premillennialist believes that this international kingdom construction task will begin in earnest a thousand years before the final judgment, with Jesus ruling from a literal throne, probably located in Jerusalem. The amillennialist views this universal extension of the kingdom of God into culture as possible only after the resurrection of all humanity at the final judgment, i.e., in a sin-free, death-free, Christians-only world.


The Grim Fate of Israel

The source of the idea of the Great Tribulation is found in Jesus’ last words regarding Israel, which are recorded in Matthew 24 and Luke 21.
And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled (Luke 21:20-24).

Throughout most of church history, this prophecy was interpreted as having been fulfilled by the Roman siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. With the rise of dispensationalism, however, the fulfillment of this passage was moved into the future.

more...

http://www.tks.org/GaryNorth.htm

Now as to scripture that serves to say outwardly the Jews are to be killed by the sword of the Christian in end times, I can not quote verse in this manner. however, it appears that there does exist a virulent form of anti-Semitism wherein Jews are to be converted as ultimately it is the Christians that are to saved by way of the rapture... and I would assume killing Jews outright is a matter of which sect of christianity we are talking about and how the cleric interprets the scriptures.

I do not speak in either bias or bigotry. I have equal contempt for these forms of fundamentalism...

Hamas is not strictly a religious group, while I am sure this same form of rabid anti-humanity may well exist within the whole, 1) hamas is a resistance to Israeli racism and occupation and 2) they have ceasefired more than once wherein Israel broke the Hudna, and 3) all fundamentalist crackpots on both sides need to be dealt with and 4) the palestinian resistance can not be bleed in with ALQ the two are distinctively different.

but I waste my breathe and have already covered most of this.

[Michele]

in fact Mr. America this quote seems to speak of it directly.

The source of the idea of the Great Tribulation is found in Jesus’ last words regarding Israel, which are recorded in Matthew 24 and Luke 21.

And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. or these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled (Luke 21:20-24).


The above speaks of the Jews... alluding to the very same end time that quote from hamas is alluding to.

IS THE SAME SENTIMENT AS EXPRESSED IN THE BUKHARI AND MUSLIM END TIMES QUOTE WITH REGARD TO THE JEWS? And if it is how many sects of Islam must there be? More than one right? So perhaps it is fair to say Hamas is alluding to end times with the killing between muslims and jews but a premonition of this horrible time in prophecy? Of course I don't know. I am not as familiar with how various sects of Islam interpret this prophecy let alone to focus on only the quote as used by hamas without seeing their cause of their resistance (however utter ineffectual and filled with vengence their use of terrorism has been). For it seems to meall of the nut wacko religious fanatics of all three religions seem to wish to blind walk toward this disaster without even thinking that god is testing the will of humanity to divert from this crisis rather than to walk toward it. did it ever cross your mind to wonder?

"for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."
http://www.tks.org/GaryNorth.htm

SO THE GENTILES CAN NOT BE FULFILLED UNTIL VENGENCE IS TAKEN UPON THE JEWS. OR this appears to be how some of our more RABID Christians sects interpret it... based in what? ANTI-SEMITISM or is it the true prophecy of God?

[Michele]

This is what I meant by additional rules and stipulations.


For someone who thinks all religion is crap, you certainly think you are qualified to comment on it.

The Talmud is not equal to scripture, any more than the Catholic Catechism is equal to the bible. The Talmud is the Jewish theologians attempts to interpret scripture and apply it to everyday life. There is nothing in scripture about "the stealing of a goy." Scripture says nothing about the blood of a Jew being different than the blood of a "goy." In fact Scripture allowed for gentiles to become Israelites. Rahab, a gentile harlot became the great grandmother of King David. And as for Shabbat; Scripture says that after God created the world He blessed the 7th Day. The Sabbath was instituted before there ever was a Jew.

God is credited with the giving of the scriptures, He did not give the commentary. As a Jew, you prove my point that your religious leaders place more importance on the man-made commenta