Following are excerpts from a sermon given Friday, October 13, in the Zayed bin Sultan Aal Nahyan mosque in Gaza, broadcast live on the official Palestinian Authority television. The speaker is Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya, Member of the PA appointed “Futwa Council” and former acting Rector of the Islamic University in Gaza:
http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/middleeast/Palestinian_TV_Kill_All_The_Jews.asp
What, exactly, is your point in posting this? It could be interpreted in several different ways.
I think he’s trying to imply that Palestinian terrorism is based solely on Islamist genocidal tendencies. Nothing to do with being oppressed.
But that’s just my impression.
But the speech (as hateful and irrational as it is) specifically identifies the creation of Isreal–which has (justifiably or not) done plenty of oppressing, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future–as the justification for the call to genocide.
And even the call to genocide isn’t as straightforward as it seems. In the parts of the world where most of the people on this board live, Judaism and other religions coexist peacefully–most of us have or had Jewish friends and neighbors. But if you lived next door to a country that was founded specifically has a Jewish state, and if, beginning on the day you were born, the only exposure you ever had to them was when they were either aiming things at you or otherwise making your life a living hell, your perceptions would certainly be different. Maybe not has extreme has the speech quoted, but likely darker then they are now. It’s human nature, and it’s hard to overcome.
I’m not saying that I agree at any level with the speech. In fact, I think it’s a very ugly thing. I simply think it deserves more analysis then people might be inclined to give, say, a speech at a KKK rally.
There are, sadly some very grey areas for this generally pro-Israel sorta-Jew:
• The Israeli government has undeniably made some bone-headed moves, could sometimes handle the situation better, and has had some lunatic right-wing leaders.
• Which doesn’t alter the fact that Israel is completely surrounded by Jew-hating nations who want nothing more than to see Israel destroyed and all Jews driven into the sea.
Solutions? I see none.
Well, or that it’s really difficult to have peaceful negotiations with somebody who calls for your death. Remember, the person making that sermon was appointed to his position by the Palestinian Authority, and that sermon ran on Palestinian State TV. So this isn’t just some random nut saying that. It’s a Palestinian Authority official.
So, how do you negotiate with a government whose spokesmen say (in a part of the sermon gum didn’t quote)
How do you negotiate with people who say they won’t negotiate?
I don’t think I’m implying anything. I merely read and watch the news, but thanks anyway, Captain Amazing and jjimm
Apparently the palestines found another way to “negotiate”:
mmmm, So they’re arguing who gets the credit for killing all those Jewish people, huh.
I wonder if an “artist” is willing to make a piece of “art” of the blown up bus. And maybe name it “Little red riding hood”?
About the killing of all Jews:
Arafat’s “constitution”.
The link to his Fateh site and the original constitution are here. That way you can verify the truth of this yourself if there is any doubt at all
The Fateh Organization is the government of palestine as a whole. It is led by Arafat. So this is not some “extremist” group of muslims. It is Arafat himself. And this will be the government of palestine. Who in this constitution has declared it’s intent to wipe out all Jews and take all Israel for itself. No matter how long it takes. This made very clear in Article 12, listed under the constitutions “Goals”.
Article (12) Complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence
*fyi: I’m not Jewish. I’m a ‘left-winger’, who thinks it’s time for the trend-followers to take a look at the left-wing ‘trend-setters’. Supporting the ‘poor’ murderous, Palestinians is passè. *
“Zionist” is not a synonym for “Jew.”
A Zionist is a Jew who believes in creating a Jewish state in Palestine. Thus, all Zionists are Jews, but not all Jews are Zionists, and stating that you want to eradicate Zionists is not the same as stating that you want to eradicate all Jews.
Therefore, that statement in that document does NOT support your assertion that Arafat’s government wants to “wipe out all Jews.”
Deciding political issues based on what’s trendy is very stupid.
The way they use it, “Zionist” is a synonym for “Israeli Jew”, though.
Well, now you’re either forgetting your own OP, or you’re just being disingenuous. Sure, part of your rant was directed at the hypocrisy of the American government, but part of it was also a call for the use of extreme Israeli force. If you remember, the final sentence of your OP said:
This is an exhortation, presumably aimed at Sharon and the Israeli government. And i’m saying that Sharon would be in a position to listen to you, and to ignore US pleas for restraint, if Israel had the fortitude to refuse US financial aid. As i said before, if you take the money, you have to accept that it might come with strings attached.
And, regarding your point about US hypocrisy, i think you’ll find that plenty of people (me included) who disagree with you totally about the Israel/Palestine situation will agree with you about US hypocrisy. You asked “Why is it OK for the US to go into Iraq for a POSSIBLE threat…” Well, many people in this country, and even more around the world, firmly believe that it wasn’t OK, even IF there had been a threat, which now seems pretty damned unlikely.
On issues of national security, national sovereignty, and national self-determination, the US government seems to have three broad categories.
For the United States, those things are inviolate. US national integrity cannot be compromised under any circumstances.
For other countries, their national boundaries and security are precious if they are friends of the US, and/or their national security is threatened by an enemy of the US.
e.g. Kuwait after the invasion by Iraq; Afghanistan after the invasion by the Soviet Union
e.g. Iran (1953), Guatemala (1954), Indonesia (1965-67), Chile (1973), East Timor (1975), Panama (1989), Afghanistan (2001)
I’m sure people can think of others i’ve forgotten.
In this whole pantheon, Israel occupies a rather unusual place. It is obviously a friend of the US; indeed, it’s probably America’s only true ally in the region, despite the general friendliness of Turkey, and the willingness of the Saudis to sell us their oil. On the other hand, the US need to maintain relations with other states in the region means that it can’t be seen to be giving Israel free rein.
Putting aside all questions of war and terrorism for a minute, there are economists who argue that Israel would actually be better off if it refused US financial aid. Much of the aid that America gives to Israel is “tied,” i.e. it can’t just be spent on anything, but must be used to purchase goods and services from US companies. In this way, Israel acts as little more than a conduit funneling American tax dollars from the American people to American corporations.
Some economists believe that Israel gets a pretty bad deal when it buys some of this stuff with tied aid money, becuase it can’t go into the global marketplace and look for the best products at the cheapest prices. Instead, it has to take what the US companies offer, at the price that they set. Not only that, but this reliance on aid has also prevented the Israeli domestic economy from realizing its full potential.
I haven’t looked closely enough at the numbers, nor am i familiar enough with the Israeli domestic economy, to be able to provide a complete analysis of those arguments, but they certainly seemed reasonable when i read them.
My apologies. It was not so much a typo as a misidentification. There is a Cheese Monkey on these boards, and i thought i was arguing with him.
Metacom
Yes! Thank you. That’s what I’ve been saying all along.
So: Wake up, trend followers. Time to move on.
Right. And “Israeli Jews” is not the same as “all Jews,” which is what Gum was assuming.
Saying “I want to kill all Christians” is a very different view then “I want to kill all Christians who live in the country right next to me and make my life a living hell.”
Well for one, what do you think would happen in the ME if Israel unilaterally attacked Palestine? Israel would be systematically invaded by pretty much every hostile Muslim nation in the area. And while the IDF is a fine fighting force, the numbers would not be in their favor. Which leaves Israel in a big mess, and in turn would leave the US in a big mess. The US couldn’t stand by and watch Israel be invaded and destroyed, so we would have to help…and well, that’s when crap goes really bad.
I don’t think GW holds Israel back out of some strange need to be seen as a hypocrite, I think he asks Israel to hold back because to do anything else would drag not only Israel, but the US, into a war that could potentially blossom into another World War.
Israeli Jews isn’t the same as all Jews, yeah, but it’s a moot point, because we’re talking specifically about the existance of Israel. What it’s saying is, “We have to fight the Israelis until we kill them all and take all the land for ourselves”
Exactly.
Gum was trying to say that they were advocating the genocide of all Jews. That’s different then advocating the destruction of Israel. It’s not a moot point, because Gum’s characterization of the position outlined in that document is a far more monstrous one then what the document is actually saying (which you summarized correctly above). Both positions are ugly, but I can understand (though not condone) where the “fight Israel” position is coming from.
MINA, Saudi Arabia (AP) - The cleric who delivered the sermon Friday at the annual hajj pilgrimage had a simple request: God grant victory to Muslims fighting around the world. The prayer by Sheik Saleh al-Taleb to 500,000 people in Mecca’s Grand Mosque and nearby streets came as the hajj neared its climax. “Oh God, give victory to the mujahedeen (holy warriors) everywhere,” al-Taleb said. “Give them victory in Palestine. Oh God, make the Muslims triumphant and destroy their enemies, and make this country and other Muslim countries safe. Oh God, inflict your wrath on the criminal Zionists.”
—As far as I can tell the only prominent Muslim speaking out against mass murder and insanity is this woman. And I’m sure she’s got the life expectancy of a fruit fly.
Metacom I sure hope you can understand [though not condone, ofcourse :rolleyes: ] this:
“martyr” Samy Rahim “Every day on which the sun rises and no Jew is killed, nor any martyr has died, will be a day for which we will be punished by Allah.” (Al-Istiqlal, August 20, 2001).
—Why does that remind me of the old Anita Bryant orange juice commercials? “A day without orange juice is like a day on which the sun rises and no Jew is killed!”
Catchy.
I just can’t accept Metacom’s position. There have been countless times in history when two groups have been in conflict, and one has been oppressed for years, without calls for genocide. Heck, the Palestinians live in luxury compared to, say, pre-civil-war black slaves, and you didn’t hear Frederick Douglass claiming he was going to get him a shotgun and kill all the whities he saw.
Furthermore, while one might argue that Israel has been treating Palestinians badly for years, it’s more accurate and fair to say that Israel and Palestine have been treating each other badly for years. And yet the Israelis, despite the incredible numbers of their innocents who have died, have not started teaching their children that the land will not be clean until every last Palestinian is dead.
And that really seals the deal as far as where my sympathies and support lie (even ignoring the unbelievably heinous way that the Palestinians have been treated by other arabs).