Muslims, Jews & Christians

Status
Not open for further replies.

BHAI1

New Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Messages
83
Reaction score
0
Muslims, Jews & Christians
Join Together To
Condemn Zionism


Anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism are not the same thing and it is vital for world peace that Jews outside Israel speak against Israel's crimes being meted out on Palestinians, a panel consisting of Christian, Jewish and Arab representatives has told a gathering of 500 delegates assembled at the School of Oriental and African, Studies, University of London.

The debate on, "Why Anti-Zionism is Not anti-Semitism" organised by Islam Channel TV was addressed by the veteran BBC TV war correspondent and author of Zionism the Real Enemies of the Jews, Alan Hart, Holocaust survivor, influential Jewish figure and author of The End of Judaism Dr Hajo G Meyer, Senior Lecturer of Political Science, Haifa University, Professor Ilan Pappe; a senior member of Jewish sect Neturei Karta, Rabbi Ahron Cohen and Palestinian representative Dr. Ghada Karmi, and the author of In Search of Fatima, the story of her exile and displacement.

In his keynote speech Alan Hart congratulated the Chief Executive of Islam Channel TV Mr Muhammad Ali for holding the debate. Hart also informed the audience that few days before the debate, the offices of Islam Channel were broken into and a number of computers were stolen. Hart said that probably someone was looking for information to prove that Islam Channel was a fundamentalist organisation which should not be allowed to hold this debate or they were simply trying to frighten Islam Channel.

Hart, who had enjoyed close friendship with "Father Palestine", Yassir Arafat and "Mother Israel" Golda Meir - so much so that despite being 48 years younger than her, in her cabinet circle, and much to their annoyance, he was known as her "boyfriend" - has over the years, waged war on Zionism. It is worth quoting two important facts from his remarkable book that, despite being praised lavishly by all of them, none of the British publishers could dare publish and therefore at last Alan at his personal expense published the book himself: "At a point" writes Hart, "I interrupted her [Golda Meir] to say: 'Prime Minister, I want to be sure I understand what you're sayingYou are saying that if ever Israel was in danger of being defeated on the battlefield, it would be prepared to take the region and even the whole world down with it?'Without the shortest of pauses of reflectionGolda replied, 'Yes, that's exactly what I am saying.'" Golda Meir had also told him on camera that, "There was no such thing as Palestinian." And according to Hart, "Her statement represented Zionism's official line on the matter; a line that was accepted and repeated parrot-like by Israel's unquestioning supporters everywhere."



Left to Right- Dr. Ghada Karmi, Rabbi Ahron Cohen, Alan Hart, Professor Ilan Pappe Dr Hajo G Meyer


Hart started his speech with a quotation from his book that reads, "If the Jews of the Diaspora can summon up the will and the courage to make common cause with the forces of reason in Israel before it is too late for us all, a very great prize awaits them. By demonstrating that right can triumph over might, and that there is a place for morality in politics, they would become the light unto nations.

"It is a prize available to no other people on earth because of the uniqueness of the suffering of the Jews. Perhaps that is the real point for the idea of the Jews as Chosen peopleChosen to endure unique suffering and, having endured it, to show the rest of us that creating better and more just world is not a mission impossible."

He said, "If any body accused me of being anti-Semitic, I would say 'Sir/Madam, You are eluded!' And if any body says to me, 'OK Alan Hart you are not anti-Semitic but what you say and write seems anti-Semitic.' I reply, 'That can't possibly be so because my main message is to the Gentiles among whom most of the world Jews live. And that message is: 'Don't blame the Jews who live among you for what a hard core of Zionists are doing in Israel.' So, don't anybody dare to accuse me of being anti-Semitic."

Hart said that since the unilateral declaration of independence by Israel an informed and honest debate has not been possible on this subject because of fear of being labelled anti-Semitic. He attacked the media and politicians for allowing themselves to be blackmailed by the Zionists. According to Hart journalists were not necessarily sympathetic to the Zionist state but the problem was with the owners of big publishers who were afraid of being punished for their honesty by their advertisement plugs being pulled.

"Many of us have been brought up mainly conditioned by the media to believe that Zionist mythology and real history is one and the same thing. They are emphatically not". Hart stressed that Zionist propaganda is aimed at getting away with its crimes and impress upon Americans, Europeans and the Jews outside that there has been a threat to its existence. He said that there has never been a threat to the existence of Zionist state.


A group of anti-zionist rabbis at the conference

Persuading Muslims in the UK to be more politically active and be part of the democratic setup, Hart said that in response to one programme news organisations receive thousands of phone calls and emails by the supporters of Zionism but few from Muslims.

He stressed that the existence of Israel is illegal and anyone in the world who could give legitimacy to the Zionist state it is the Palestinians, the rightful owners of the occupied land. He said that two state solution is not a solution. The only solution, he said, was "one state" in which Jews and Palestinians can live together.

Rabbi Ahron Cohen, whose house had been bombarded with 1,000 eggs, presumably by Zionists, few weeks ago, said that what the Zionist state was doing with the Palestinians was blatant violation of the teachings of Judaism.

Responding to a question the Rabbi said although it was not always a bed of roses, before the creation of the Zionist state, Jews in Muslim lands enjoyed prosperity and good relations with Muslims.

In his response to Alan Hart's speech Professor Ilan Pappe said that there was no Jews Diaspora in the world. "If there is any Diaspora it is the Palestinian Diaspora who have to return to their land." He said that for world peace and for the welfare of Palestinians and the Jews boycott of the Zionist state was vital. Taking his inspiration from history he said that it took two brave women in Dublin to mobilise anti-apartheid movement in the world and there was no reason why the world could not force Israel to discard its inhuman policies.

In his vehement condemnation of Zionism, Holocaust survivor Dr Hajo G Meyer said that Zionism predates fascism and fascists and Zionists had a history of cooperating with each other. He said that the Zionist state of Israel wants to create anti-Semitism in the world so that more and more Jews start migrating to Israel.

Palestinian representative Dr Ghada Karmi said that Europe had dumped its problem, alien creatures, on the Palestinian people. She said that Palestinian Jews were as much opposed to the creation of a Zionist state on their land as Palestinian Muslims and Palestinian Christians because they were fully conscious of the devastation the "aliens" (non-Palestinian Jews) were going to bring in the region with them. She rejected the division of Palestinian lands into two states and emphasised that instead of solving the dispute it would create more problems. All of the panellists agreed with her.



http://www.indianmuslims.info/news/2006/july/02/articles/muslims_jews_
and_christians_join_together_to_condemn_zionism.html
 
What about Buddhism? I think they should condem zionism too.
 
What is your definition of "Zionism"?

Who are the "Zionists"?


The debate on, "Why Anti-Zionism is Not anti-Semitism" organised by Islam Channel TV was addressed by the veteran BBC TV war correspondent and author of Zionism the Real Enemies of the Jews, Alan Hart, Holocaust survivor, influential Jewish figure and author of The End of Judaism Dr Hajo G Meyer, Senior Lecturer of Political Science, Haifa University, Professor Ilan Pappe; a senior member of Jewish sect Neturei Karta, Rabbi Ahron Cohen and Palestinian representative Dr. Ghada Karmi, and the author of In Search of Fatima, the story of her exile and displacement.
Was this truly a two-way debate?

... He said that there has never been a threat to the existence of Zionist state.
Huh?


...He stressed that the existence of Israel is illegal...
Excuse me?


... Professor Ilan Pappe said that there was no Jews Diaspora in the world.
What!?


... Dr Hajo G Meyer said ... that the Zionist state of Israel wants to create anti-Semitism in the world so that more and more Jews start migrating to Israel.
????????


Palestinian representative Dr Ghada Karmi said that Europe had dumped its problem, alien creatures, on the Palestinian people.
So, these "debators" aren't anti-Jew but Karmi calls Jews "alien creatures" who were "dumped" after the Holocaust.


She said that Palestinian Jews were as much opposed to the creation of a Zionist state on their land as Palestinian Muslims and Palestinian Christians because they were fully conscious of the devastation the "aliens" (non-Palestinian Jews) were going to bring in the region with them...
:roll:


... All of the panellists agreed with her.
I thought this was a "debate"? How can all the panellists agree in a debate? Did anyone represent the other side?
 
Muhammad's Sword
Why did Pope Benedict utter these words in public? And why now?


by Uri Avnery

September 26, 2006
Gush shalom


Email this article to a friend
Print this article


Since the days when Roman Emperors threw Christians to the lions, the relations between the emperors and the heads of the church have undergone many changes.

Constantine the Great, who became Emperor in the year 306 - exactly 1700 years ago - encouraged the practice of Christianity in the empire, which included Palestine. Centuries later, the church split into an Eastern (Orthodox) and a Western (Catholic) part. In the West, the Bishop of Rome, who acquired the title of Pope, demanded that the Emperor accept his superiority.

The struggle between the Emperors and the Popes played a central role in European history and divided the peoples. It knew ups and downs. Some Emperors dismissed or expelled a Pope, some Popes dismissed or excommunicated an Emperor. One of the Emperors, Henry IV, "walked to Canossa", standing for three days barefoot in the snow in front of the Pope's castle, until the Pope deigned to annul his excommunication.

But there were times when Emperors and Popes lived in peace with each other. We are witnessing such a period today. Between the present Pope, Benedict XVI, and the present Emperor, George Bush II, there exists a wonderful harmony. Last week's speech by the Pope, which aroused a world-wide storm, went well with Bush's crusade against "Islamofascism", in the context of the "Clash of Civilizations".

IN HIS lecture at a German university, the 265th Pope described what he sees as a huge difference between Christianity and Islam: while Christianity is based on reason, Islam denies it. While Christians see the logic of God's actions, Muslims deny that there is any such logic in the actions of Allah.

As a Jewish atheist, I do not intend to enter the fray of this debate. It is much beyond my humble abilities to understand the logic of the Pope. But I cannot overlook one passage, which concerns me too, as an Israeli living near the fault-line of this "war of civilizations".

In order to prove the lack of reason in Islam, the Pope asserts that the prophet Muhammad ordered his followers to spread their religion by the sword. According to the Pope, that is unreasonable, because faith is born of the soul, not of the body. How can the sword influence the soul?

To support his case, the Pope quoted - of all people - a Byzantine Emperor, who belonged, of course, to the competing Eastern Church. At the end of the 14th century, the Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus told of a debate he had - or so he said (its occurrence is in doubt) - with an unnamed Persian Muslim scholar. In the heat of the argument, the Emperor (according to himself) flung the following words at his adversary:

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached".

These words give rise to three questions: (a) Why did the Emperor say them? (b) Are they true? (c) Why did the present Pope quote them?

WHEN MANUEL II wrote his treatise, he was the head of a dying empire. He assumed power in 1391, when only a few provinces of the once illustrious empire remained. These, too, were already under Turkish threat.

At that point in time, the Ottoman Turks had reached the banks of the Danube. They had conquered Bulgaria and the north of Greece, and had twice defeated relieving armies sent by Europe to save the Eastern Empire. In 1453, only a few years after Manuel's death, his capital, Constantinople (the present Istanbul) fell to the Turks, putting an end to the Empire that had lasted for more than a thousand years.

During his reign, Manuel made the rounds of the capitals of Europe in an attempt to drum up support. He promised to reunite the church. There is no doubt that he wrote his religious treatise in order to incite the Christian countries against the Turks and convince them to start a new crusade. The aim was practical, theology was serving politics.

In this sense, the quote serves exactly the requirements of the present Emperor, George Bush II. He, too, wants to unite the Christian world against the mainly Muslim "Axis of Evil". Moreover, the Turks are again knocking on the doors of Europe, this time peacefully. It is well known that the Pope supports the forces that object to the entry of Turkey into the European Union.

IS THERE any truth in Manuel's argument?

The pope himself threw in a word of caution. As a serious and renowned theologian, he could not afford to falsify written texts. Therefore, he admitted that the Qur'an specifically forbade the spreading of the faith by force. He quoted the second Sura, verse 256 (strangely fallible, for a pope, he meant verse 257) which says: "There must be no coercion in matters of faith".

How can one ignore such an unequivocal statement? The Pope simply argues that this commandment was laid down by the prophet when he was at the beginning of his career, still weak and powerless, but that later on he ordered the use of the sword in the service of the faith. Such an order does not exist in the Qur'an. True, Muhammad called for the use of the sword in his war against opposing tribes - Christian, Jewish and others - in Arabia, when he was building his state. But that was a political act, not a religious one; basically a fight for territory, not for the spreading of the faith.

Jesus said: "You will recognize them by their fruits." The treatment of other religions by Islam must be judged by a simple test: How did the Muslim rulers behave for more than a thousand years, when they had the power to "spread the faith by the sword"?

Well, they just did not.

For many centuries, the Muslims ruled Greece. Did the Greeks become Muslims? Did anyone even try to Islamize them? On the contrary, Christian Greeks held the highest positions in the Ottoman administration. The Bulgarians, Serbs, Romanians, Hungarians and other European nations lived at one time or another under Ottoman rule and clung to their Christian faith. Nobody compelled them to become Muslims and all of them remained devoutly Christian.

True, the Albanians did convert to Islam, and so did the Bosniaks. But nobody argues that they did this under duress. They adopted Islam in order to become favorites of the government and enjoy the fruits.

In 1099, the Crusaders conquered Jerusalem and massacred its Muslim and Jewish inhabitants indiscriminately, in the name of the gentle Jesus. At that time, 400 years into the occupation of Palestine by the Muslims, Christians were still the majority in the country. Throughout this long period, no effort was made to impose Islam on them. Only after the expulsion of the Crusaders from the country, did the majority of the inhabitants start to adopt the Arabic language and the Muslim faith - and they were the forefathers of most of today's Palestinians.

THERE IS no evidence whatsoever of any attempt to impose Islam on the Jews. As is well known, under Muslim rule the Jews of Spain enjoyed a bloom the like of which the Jews did not enjoy anywhere else until almost our time. Poets like Yehuda Halevy wrote in Arabic, as did the great Maimonides. In Muslim Spain, Jews were ministers, poets, scientists. In Muslim Toledo, Christian, Jewish and Muslim scholars worked together and translated the ancient Greek philosophical and scientific texts. That was, indeed, the Golden Age. How would this have been possible, had the Prophet decreed the "spreading of the faith by the sword"?

What happened afterwards is even more telling. When the Catholics re-conquered Spain from the Muslims, they instituted a reign of religious terror. The Jews and the Muslims were presented with a cruel choice: to become Christians, to be massacred or to leave. And where did the hundreds of thousand of Jews, who refused to abandon their faith, escape? Almost all of them were received with open arms in the Muslim countries. The Sephardi ("Spanish") Jews settled all over the Muslim world, from Morocco in the west to Iraq in the east, from Bulgaria (then part of the Ottoman Empire) in the north to Sudan in the south. Nowhere were they persecuted. They knew nothing like the tortures of the Inquisition, the flames of the auto-da-fe, the pogroms, the terrible mass-expulsions that took place in almost all Christian countries, up to the Holocaust.

WHY? Because Islam expressly prohibited any persecution of the "peoples of the book". In Islamic society, a special place was reserved for Jews and Christians. They did not enjoy completely equal rights, but almost. They had to pay a special poll-tax, but were exempted from military service - a trade-off that was quite welcome to many Jews. It has been said that Muslim rulers frowned upon any attempt to convert Jews to Islam even by gentle persuasion - because it entailed the loss of taxes.

Every honest Jew who knows the history of his people cannot but feel a deep sense of gratitude to Islam, which has protected the Jews for fifty generations, while the Christian world persecuted the Jews and tried many times "by the sword" to get them to abandon their faith.

THE STORY about "spreading the faith by the sword" is an evil legend, one of the myths that grew up in Europe during the great wars against the Muslims - the reconquista of Spain by the Christians, the Crusades and the repulsion of the Turks, who almost conquered Vienna. I suspect that the German Pope, too, honestly believes in these fables. That means that the leader of the Catholic world, who is a Christian theologian in his own right, did not make the effort to study the history of other religions.

Why did he utter these words in public? And why now?

There is no escape from viewing them against the background of the new Crusade of Bush and his evangelist supporters, with his slogans of "Islamofascism" and the "Global War on Terrorism" - when "terrorism" has become a synonym for Muslims. For Bush's handlers, this is a cynical attempt to justify the domination of the world's oil resources. Not for the first time in history, a religious robe is spread to cover the nakedness of economic interests; not for the first time, a robbers' expedition becomes a Crusade.

The speech of the Pope blends into this effort. Who can foretell the dire consequences?

Muhammad's Sword
 
this zionist

the Jewish people have never had a friend in both fair and foul weather. Our allies have betrayed us, deserted us in our...
Zionism
 
Anti-Zionism is nothing more than the new version of Anti-Semitism. To claim otherwise is simply to be misinformed.

Anti-Zionism is founded on the assumption that behind the smiles of Jews, their international goodwill and their stated commitment to peace lies a sinister ideology of racism. That is called Anti-Semitism.

All 'Anti-Zionists' are either Anti-Semitic or gravely misinformed about what Israel is and its relation to the Palestinian Territories.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top