First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Violence on the Temple Mount
93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Ohigho
Offline
Posted 10/28/09

JJT2

now whose being ignorant and bias? B)
I have no idea what you are referring to...



This entire issue is a social/philosophical one, so your "mental evolution" wont help a thing.Evolution is physical in nature btw.and violence is in our genes or testosterone...or maybe our brains either way it wont go away
Social evolution happens, can you civil rights? Abolition? Domestic violence laws? etc etc...

Evolution is an idea, that is not strictly confined to The Origin of Species...



And no, these 3rd to 2nd world countries in no way would risks nuking thier holy sites, so they r not a danger to the rest of us.

The only REAL danger lies in the political dogma of the 1st world countries with their "need to make everything right" peace over war


Whoa, talk about clueless... for one thing, I cannot understand what you mean when you said "hese 3rd to 2nd world countries in no way would risks nuking thier holy sites," What? And they most certianly are a danger, all religion is a danger to peaceful secular society.

And its not a matter of nuking the COUNTRIES at all, its contaminating the ridiculous patches of sand that fanatics hold so dear and spill so much blood over, denying them to EVERYONE so people cannot fight over them anymore and maybe take a step back and realize how stupid it all was...
4294 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
forgot where
Offline
Posted 10/28/09

Ryutai-Desk wrote:


JJT2 wrote:

if they bring guns, then u bring bigger guns. Like the rocket launchers, needle bombs, M14, tommy gun, and nunchakus. if u kill all of your enemies, their wont be ne one left to fight, then peace will rain. peace over war


Assuming one sides has exterminate all of its enemies, but is it over? It's not.
The problems in Israel-Palestine, each sides are being supported by nations on the world. If one side assassinate the other side, there will be more come to kill the side who've won, if they can exterminate the other side, the supporter from other side will come again and killing each other again and again.

Just to let you know, that land involved for the rest of the world. If you use that method, every single humans will be killed in that land. And it will has impact to the outside of land too. It creates hatred amongst nations that support different sides on the land. The solution is talk, not war. Well, maybe it'll works if they kill the provocateur who only wanted to kill.


so...world war three? hey, WW1 and WW2 didnt end up as badly as we thought it would. maybe a WW3 could be fun u know? think of what lessons we could learn.... the value of comradship...of love and respect? a deep bond that can only be produced in combat the love between a man and a woman in arms is the deepest kind of love thier is And when the war is over, we can bring about peace and understanding...with new martial arts fo our children to learn. Talk is cheap, actions speak louder then words. peace over war
4294 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
forgot where
Offline
Posted 10/28/09

Sturmrabe wrote:


JJT2

now whose being ignorant and bias? B)
I have no idea what you are referring to...



This entire issue is a social/philosophical one, so your "mental evolution" wont help a thing.Evolution is physical in nature btw.and violence is in our genes or testosterone...or maybe our brains either way it wont go away
Social evolution happens, can you civil rights? Abolition? Domestic violence laws? etc etc...

Evolution is an idea, that is not strictly confined to The Origin of Species...



And no, these 3rd to 2nd world countries in no way would risks nuking thier holy sites, so they r not a danger to the rest of us.

The only REAL danger lies in the political dogma of the 1st world countries with their "need to make everything right" peace over war


Whoa, talk about clueless... for one thing, I cannot understand what you mean when you said "hese 3rd to 2nd world countries in no way would risks nuking thier holy sites," What? And they most certianly are a danger, all religion is a danger to peaceful secular society.

And its not a matter of nuking the COUNTRIES at all, its contaminating the ridiculous patches of sand that fanatics hold so dear and spill so much blood over, denying them to EVERYONE so people cannot fight over them anymore and maybe take a step back and realize how stupid it all was...


u and i both know that i am 100% ignorant of this entire situtation. All this was a feint in order for you to reveal your true objectives...which is And they most certianly are a danger, all religion is a danger to peaceful secular society.

A danger to who? And how is religion a danger to peaceful secular societies? are u saying societies cant be peaceful with religion? peace over war
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 10/28/09

SeraphAlford wrote:

Why should they have to get everybody’s permission to construct the temple? That’s like saying that if the Muslims wanted to establish a Mosque in Mecca they must first petition the Jewish minority and plead for permission. This being said I think that the internationally community should do everything in its power to prevent them from touching the Mosque even if it means sanctioning Israel into oblivion.


Because you can't build your holy place by replacing another holy place from different religion. What would happen if Jews claims the land that St. Andrew Great Church stand on was their Temple? Would you agree on it if they only want to build their temple by not sharing it, rather destroy it?


SeraphAlford wrote:

Israel’s officials are the ones who’re protecting the mosque from a private organization in Israel. The Temple Institute isn’t a part of the Israeli government. It’s just an association in Israel that’s affiliated with right wing politics.

That’s why the Jews are upset with their government. That’s why all those rabbis came together to protest the Israeli government and that politician addressed the Israelis promising them that the Israeli police forces weren’t ‘anti-Jewish.’

Under Jordanian rule Jewish holy sites were not maintained and Jews were effectively barred from visiting the Wailing Wall. Now that Israel maintains control the Mosque al-Aqsa and Temple Mount remain under the administration of the Waqf and the Jews are STILL barred from conducting services there even though the site is monumentally more important in Judaism than it is in Christianity or Islam, or both combined for that matter.

The Jews look at this and they look at the Greater Middle East and they see Muslim nations protecting Muslims and Islam. They see all of this and they wonder, “Why is the Jewish state not doing the same thing for the Jews? Why is it actually allowing and advocating state level limitation of Jewish religious rights on OUR holiest site?”


I know, Israel police always preventing the orthodox Jews send the 'foundation stone' every year. I've seen the video of the attempt by Jews to build their third temple. If Israel government as the one who have a mandatory on the sites allowing Jews to build one. They'd the one who will be blamed by International communities, and the clash will once more happen. Maybe the biggest ever seen in Jerusalem modern history.

Because Jews are not being considerate when it comes to praying. They trying to build the third temple by destroying the other holy sites. That's intolerance. You think Israel governments do not help them? Many excavation and construction being build within Al-Aqsa territory, not to mention the underground tunnel and such. Israel government wanted to help Jews secretly to not being seen for violating international laws.


SeraphAlford wrote:

Christianity doesn’t seem to place much religious value on geographical locations or architectural monuments. It’s mostly a Jewish and Muslim thing, not very many Christians identify with Jerusalem as a centre for spirituality or sanctity.

Also, as we both know Jerusalem is not the holiest site for Islam. It is only the holiest site for Judaism. The Ka’bah is the holiest site in Islam. Jerusalem the city is only historically significant and the Mosque al-Aqsa is the THIRD holiest site in Islam.

For over 3,300 years, Jerusalem has been the Jewish capital. Jerusalem has never been the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. Even when the Jordanians occupied Jerusalem, they never sought to make it their capital, and Arab leaders did not come to visit.

Jerusalem is mentioned over 700 times in Tanakh, the Jewish Holy Scriptures. Jerusalem is not mentioned once in the Qur‘an. The Hadith makes what –most- Muslim scholars argue are vague references to Jerusalem. They are stories of Muhammad stopping by for the night and ascending, but the Qur’an explains that these events took place in a dream; moreover, I recently heard an argument between a Sunni and Shiite scholar about rather or not Jerusalem was the actual location. The word used was “distant place,” or “farther mosque.”

King David chose Jerusalem as the capital of Judaism, Muhammad never even went there. The Jews even pray facing Jerusalem while Muslims pray facing the Ka’bah.

Jerusalem is the holiest site in one religion and just significant to the other two.


I've talk with another christian and they said Jerusalem is their holy land than Vatican, as Jesus were there to help Jerusalem citizens from robbery and other crimes. Well, I don't know which is right, though... Catholic or Protestant.

Yes, Al-Aqsa mosque it the 3rd holiest site in Islam. So, because it less 'holiest' than another, we could destroy it right away? King Abdullah II had visited Jeruslam in 1910 if I'm not wrong. Saladin, the leader of Egyptian army gained control of Jerusalem and also Ottoman army came to Jerusalem or rather to Al-Aqsa mosque to pray there.

It's not a dream. It's actually happened when Prophet fly from Madinah to Jerusalem in one night, then continuing his journey to receive the order of praying 5 times from God to muslims. That's arguable, but if it's not in Jerusalem, that's not make any difference. The point is, you can't build your holy place by destroying another religious place. That's common rule in every single Church, Synagogue, Temple or Mosque. What kind of tolerance the religions want to teach if they make it by simply ignoring another religion?


SeraphAlford wrote:

The Palestinians and Muslims in the area beg to differ. They don’t want Jews in Israel at all. Hell, they ‘re flipping out because Jews excavated a historical landmark NEAR the mosque.

Whenever the Muslims had control of the area they promptly began destroying Jewish graves and synagogues. They barred the Jews from conducting their services in Jerusalem and violated religious rights. Now, mind you, I’m sure more moderate Muslims elsewhere in the world would be willing to let them build a replica of their temple at some other place in the city. I bet you that the United Arab Emirates would be receptive to it, and maybe Egypt. Other than that I don’t foresee any Arab/Muslim nation accepting it and think that the Muslims in the area would be pissed if the Jews even tried. If the Muslims in the area were given their way they’d still be desecrating graves and destroying synagogues in their little fit of “manifest destiny.”

The Jewish state became a nation in 1312 B.C.E., two thousand years before the rise of Islam. For 3,300 years Jerusalem has been the capital of Judaism. You are correct, the Jews were there first.


It is, because of the conflict when British came to the land and made dispute amongst them. They were used to be lived together, peacefully under Egyptian army and Ottoman empire. Having equal rights to pray and live. And British destroyed it by provoked them and spread false accusations amongst them. It's clear the hatred will eventually spread because of conspiracy and invader attempt o separate Jerusalem citizens to make it easier to conquer.

There's no manifest destiny in Islam by destroying another religious place, moreover Jews. In history Muslims were getting along together with Jews more than with Christian. It because of 2 Muslims army and Empire being considerate to all religions in Jerusalem, then British came brought their gospel to make Jews and Muslims hating each other. Also for conquering purpose.

I wouldn't say a nation. But a gathering of religious people of Jews because David and Solomon were there by teaching their 'One God' to pagan believer. In Islam, Jews is a religion that always being acknowledged for the first attempt to change Pagan believer to pray in 'One God'. As well as David and Solomon (Daud and Sulaiman in Islam) were also prophet in Islam. But then, Muslims came to Jerusalem as new religions and teach Jews to follow Islam as it is fixed religion with more rules in it.


SeraphAlford wrote:

You cannot build the Temple anywhere else. You can only build a replica of the temple. They don’t want a replica. They want Solomon’s Temple. The point is that the Mosque they want to destroy should’ve never been built in the first place. It’s sitting on the ruins of their temple to prevent them from rebuilding it.

The Mosque al-Aqsa actually sits upon the platform constructed as the foundation of the Temple of Solomon by Herod the Great. In other words, the foundation of the Mosque al-Aqsa is basically part of Solomon’s Temple.

Imagine that a great earthquake came and destroyed the Ka’bah in Mecca. Before the Muslims could recover and rebuild the Christians came and built a cathedral upon the ruins. They used the black stone to mount a crucifix and carved into the black stone, “Jesus is God.” Then, after this, they began hurtling stones and Molotov cocktails at all the Muslims who tried to pray or gather there while screaming “This is our holiest site,” for fear that the Muslims wanted to rebuild the Ka’bah and destroy the cathedral.

How would Saudi Arabia react? How would you react? How would Muslims all around the world react? Would they tolerate it? Hell no, but that’s what the Jews are doing-and more. The Jews are actually conceding control of the site and the Muslims are abusing it by discriminating against the very people who could so easily take their holy site back.


Because of that, you have rights to destroying another religions site?
Ask Muslims at that time, why they were being allowed to build Mosque from Jerusalem citizens. It's clear that Jerusalem citizens accepted Muslims as a new religion brought by Prophet. After all, it's been destroyed. It's only a dust land if you don't make anything on it. Dome of Rock and Al-Aqsa are the only building remains there to make the holiest site not becoming eradicate of its holy image.

That'd never happened, because there's no attempt from another religion to build anything in Mecca, besides it's in Saudi territory, while Jerusalem is in everyone's territory. Along with Muslims nations and the origin place of David and Solomon as Jews place. Jerusalem or rather Temple Mount became like that is because of history, the history that accept Muslims to build Mosque there. Jews at that time, allowed Muslims and accepted Muslims to exist there. For the symbol of Islam existence, they built the Mosque rather build the Temple.

It's about acceptance. Of course, no Muslims will accept it if that happened. But Jews, or rather Jerusalem citizens accepted Muslims to build Al-Aqsa. Well, now we talk about different Jews, different citizens from past and present.


SeraphAlford wrote:

Israel has made plenty of concessions to peace. As I’ve said before the problem is that neither side trusts that the other side’s concessions are sincere. After Israel agreed to the last unilateral cease fire with Hamas occupied Gaza both sides were living up to their end of the agreement until they became mutually convinced that the other side was conspiring against them.


Why they violated the truce by attacking Muslims when they celebrated Ramadhan in December '08 and January '09?


SeraphAlford wrote:

During the 2006 elections Hamas won a majority seats, just like the Democratic political party here in America won a majority seats in the United States government during our 2008 elections. The difference is that the Democrats didn’t proceed to use their power to drive out the republicans and begin executing conservatives.

Hamas won a democratic victory once, so what. That’s irrelevant. They ceased power in Gaza via a violent coup. The people support them because those who don’t support them get caught up in drive by shootings, get thrown off buildings, or--as in one example caught on tape-- beaten to death on their wedding day while armed gunmen shoot at their guests and chase civilians including women and children with cars.

Nobody was bothered by the election results. Did anybody in the western hemisphere even know what the hell Hamas was in 2006? No, it wasn’t until 2007 when they started their coup and began cleansing Gaza of anybody who might disagree with their terrorist reign. Even then only a few people heard about it. I myself had heard the word maybe twice in passing comments on CNN or Fox before the recent campaign in Gaza.



The problem is, Israel would never accept Hamas even when the election hasn't started yet. So no matter how much Hamas won by all Palestinians voice, they won't become a winner and won't has rights to authorize Palestinian as democracy works. What kind of democracy Israel or rather UN and US want to implement there?

I've seen you video before and and I've explained it in Iran's Nuclear Ambition thread.
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 10/28/09

JJT2 wrote:

so...world war three? hey, WW1 and WW2 didnt end up as badly as we thought it would. maybe a WW3 could be fun u know? think of what lessons we could learn.... the value of comradship...of love and respect? a deep bond that can only be produced in combat the love between a man and a woman in arms is the deepest kind of love thier is And when the war is over, we can bring about peace and understanding...with new martial arts fo our children to learn. Talk is cheap, actions speak louder then words. peace over war



The value, love and respect only apply to Soldiers not to villagers. Not all people are soldiers, therefore by war you can't form bond of love to all people. Sure, military could build respect, bravery, strength and discipline within even a Private. But do elder, childrens and women feel that way? They are always on the weak side if war happens.

For military and war ideology only benefit to people who are soldiers or into military. North Korea, Myanmar, Libya and many other nations still being controlled under military forces and their general. That doesn't mean its people love them, it might rather hate them for violence act upon them.

Talk is about understanding others, actions is the implementation of talk. It's related.
If you act before think, it only causing destruction. Business will collapse without think and talk if they only know to produce and produce and not cooperating to others company and customers.
93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Ohigho
Offline
Posted 10/28/09 , edited 10/28/09
No, I Kinda assumed you knew something of what you were talking about...

All this was a feint in order for you to reveal your true objectives...which is And they most certianly are a danger, all religion is a danger to peaceful secular society.

A danger to who? And how is religion a danger to peaceful secular societies? are u saying societies cant be peaceful with religion? peace over war

Societies cannot be peaceful with monotheism.

The idea of mutual exclusion leads to dehumanization, dehumanization is the first step in genocide. Sure sure, there are plenty of reasons for people to go around slaughtering each other, but the idea of "convert or die" or anyone who is not X religion is less than human (look at how the natives in North and South America were treated, not only by the Spanish but by the US as well, all the way up until the 20th century) lends itself to a "guiltless" slaughter by the "true believer"...

The SCALE of inhumanity is geometrically increased when you add religion into the equation.

The Jews have this funny little word called Goyim (I think thats how its spelled), some try to say -apologetically- that its just a matter-of-fact term for non-Jews, but if you know any Jewish people, they can tell you its like the N-word, but for all non-Jews... you have this idea of "We are God's Chosen People so we are inherently better than everyone else" that is an elitism of the highest degree... as the progenitor of Islam and Xianity this idea has flourished and grown, and ironically turned back on and used against its creators to excuse their own genocide, and used to justify anything and everything...

Manifest Destiny (google it if you need to), what the Spanish did to the central/south Americans, the Crusades, the Muslim wars of expansion, the Inquisition, I could add more if I looked some up, but thats off the top of my head...

You don't get things like that with poly or pantheism, Hindus never killed people over religion, just old fashioned reasons like land and wealth... good, standard reasons for killing people that had a specific purpose [take X land, get Y money] than exhausted itself when the purpose was served... the only people that ever had any religious conflicts with Hindus are -SHOCKSHOCK- Muslims aka monotheists...

But there is NEVER an end to religious based conflict as it is based on a subjective idea... you want to know what would happen if the whole world converted to the same religion?

Google Shia and Sunni, and you will see...


4294 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
forgot where
Offline
Posted 10/28/09

Sturmrabe wrote:

No, I Kinda assumed you knew something of what you were talking about...

All this was a feint in order for you to reveal your true objectives...which is And they most certianly are a danger, all religion is a danger to peaceful secular society.

A danger to who? And how is religion a danger to peaceful secular societies? are u saying societies cant be peaceful with religion? peace over war

Societies cannot be peaceful with monotheism.

The idea of mutual exclusion leads to dehumanization, dehumanization is the first step in genocide. Sure sure, there are plenty of reasons for people to go around slaughtering each other, but the idea of "convert or die" or anyone who is not X religion is less than human (look at how the natives in North and South America were treated, not only by the Spanish but by the US as well, all the way up until the 20th century) lends itself to a "guiltless" slaughter by the "true believer"...

The SCALE of inhumanity is geometrically increased when you add religion into the equation.

The Jews have this funny little word called Goyim (I think thats how its spelled), some try to say -apologetically- that its just a matter-of-fact term for non-Jews, but if you know any Jewish people, they can tell you its like the N-word, but for all non-Jews... you have this idea of "We are God's Chosen People so we are inherently better than everyone else" that is an elitism of the highest degree... as the progenitor of Islam and Xianity this idea has flourished and grown, and ironically turned back on and used against its creators to excuse their own genocide, and used to justify anything and everything...

Manifest Destiny (google it if you need to), what the Spanish did to the central/south Americans, the Crusades, the Muslim wars of expansion, the Inquisition, I could add more if I looked some up, but thats off the top of my head...

You don't get things like that with poly or pantheism, Hindus never killed people over religion, just old fashioned reasons like land and wealth... good, standard reasons for killing people that had a specific purpose [take X land, get Y money] than exhausted itself when the purpose was served... the only people that ever had any religious conflicts with Hindus are -SHOCKSHOCK- Muslims aka monotheists...

But there is NEVER an end to religious based conflict as it is based on a subjective idea... you want to know what would happen if the whole world converted to the same religion?

Googe Shia and Sunni, and you will see...




ehh, i have argued this philosophy b4, but war, killing, ect. Is in our genes, brains, blood, natural instinct, ect. societies cannot be peaceful for long periods of time without the influence of war. Its a balancing act of yin and yang. where there is war there is peace.

you cant have one without the other. and religion was always a convienent excuss for war, but not all religious wars killed purly out of religious interest. money and Land were always in the forefront.

"Manifest Destiny (google it if you need to), what the Spanish did to the central/south Americans, the Crusades, the Muslim wars of expansion, the Inquisition, I could add more if I looked some up, but thats off the top of my head..."

From the top of my head, all of those had something to do with money, power, and/or materialism along with God. Take God out of the equation and you still get stuff like this= WW1, WW2, cold War, and virtually every modern War.

crime/sin/ect isnt an abnormality, its normal. you can blame it on religion, free enterprise, politics, humans, nature, science, white people, black people, asians, ect.
the list goes on, and i can give valid reasons for each and every one. but what u will find out is that utopia doesnt exists in this plane of existence. It never has and never will. This philosophy is as old as religion its self.

I suppose a utopia is possible if u r willing to give up 98% of your freedom and 89% of yur congitive reasoning abilities...but wars exists even in nature. I saw an red ant colony on tv march into a black ant colony and kill every resident there, brought the eggs back to thier queen to feed thier own young. Talk about genocide...

i think It's more productive to control crime rather then eliminate it.peace over war
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 10/28/09

DomFortress wrote:


Ryutai-Desk wrote:


Cool story as always.

Stones and Molotov? How about 44. Magnum caliber or 45 ACP shot to your head. Even you won't realized you already died until you arrive 'there'. That's what happening there. Could you tell me how to control a bloody chaos with such depression situation there? It it works, we could send it to Israel's official and Palestine government.

How the heck should I know? When I don't even use guns nor religion to cure my depression, because I find good old fashion physical activities did it for me.

Oh.


Okay... that's good for you.
However, I did not post here to talking about your personal life or something that very irrelevant to the matter. What's your suggestion to end the conflict there? With proper explanation and method, not by personal opinions.
93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Ohigho
Offline
Posted 10/28/09 , edited 10/28/09
Again JJ you completely miss the point, I SPECIFICALLY said that without religion there are plenty of other reason to kill people...

And you don't need to tell me about the genetic/evolutionary forces behind xenophobia and violence, I could write a book about it considering all the research I have done.

But if you look at ANY instance of genocide EVER, be it in Somalia or Darfur or 1930/40's Europe (don't forget that the French and Russians were at it too, and its been said that Stalin probably killed almost as many Jews as Hitler ever did, several mass graves came up later to find Russian-used caliber bullets in there, but all that aside) or anywhere else, the principal catalyst used to overcome people's natural revulsion against wholesale rapine and slaughter (and it IS more common to be repulsed by it than not) is dehumanization.

Making X tribe/race/religion/etc less than human, so killing them isn't as bad... comparable to swatting flies or smashing roaches... in this effort religion, and specifically monotheism (a distinction you also ignored), is paramount, and even excels at!

Unlike ants, humans have certain things we are both genetically and socially predisposed against... cannibalism (one need not have a society that is anti-cannibalism to prevent it, but you HAVE to have pro-cannibalism tenets in your society to facilitate it, and yes I have studied cannibalism in Africa and elsewhere), murder (esp. cold blooded), rape, etc...

It is the NORM for humanity to be repulsed by these things, and those sociopaths who do them without any compunction otherwise are aberrations.. perhaps not as much as some people feel comfortable with admitting to themselves, but none the less, if these things were status quo human society could never have come this far.

One need some motivating factor, or conscious blocking tool... some way to take a human mind and trick into thinking "this is not human, so my normal moral reactions do not apply"...

BUT the trick is, it has to be so completely seductive and pervasive to get down into the thought patterns.. and only cultural inundation (see propaganda taught to children in Nazi Germany) and religion have that kind of power... (and of course religion was also used as a factor in the Jews v. Xian angle used in the propaganda.)

So sighting WW1 was incorrect, because there was no genocide there, just lots of people dying, so while it does demonstrate that people can kill without religious motivation, I never said they couldn't so it bears not at all on my argument, and religion WAS used as part of the justification of the genocide during WW2 so that only works towards the point I was trying to make.

Also, I never said a damn thing about utopia, so I dunno where the Hel you are going with that...
4053 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Yo Mommas House
Offline
Posted 10/28/09
Wow Sturmrabe you actually metioned the word Goyim. By any chance have you read any of the Talmud? I know Goyim is a racist word said by some Jews refering to us "non jews" as cattle or something. I just didnt think that word was used so much in the public where people would pay much attention to it. But yes I have heard of that word many times.
93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Ohigho
Offline
Posted 10/28/09

drizza wrote:

Wow Sturmrabe you actually metioned the word Goyim. By any chance have you read any of the Talmud? I know Goyim is a racist word said by some Jews refering to us "non jews" as cattle or something. I just didnt think that word was used so much in the public where people would pay much attention to it. But yes I have heard of that word many times.

have I read the Talmud? Nope, but I know a slur (I cannot call it a racial slur as it completely transcends that distinction) when I hear one, and it immediately triggered my Hypocrisy Detector so i did research on it specifically :D
10452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 10/29/09

Because you can't build your holy place by replacing another holy place from different religion


You and I agree on that point. I already said the Jews should not be allowed to tear down the Mosque al Aqsa, but that doesn’t answer my question. My question wasn’t why they shouldn’t be allowed to build a temple, it was why they should have to first petition every minority religious group in Jerusalem before making a decision? Why not just run it like every other democracy where the majority rules, especially since the Muslims completely ignore the Jewish will in Mecca as well as the Temple Mount?


What would happen if Jews claims the land that St. Andrew Great Church stand on was their Temple?


Then people would laugh at them because the historical fact of the matter is that the Mosque al-Aqsa was built on their temple, not St. Andrew’s Church.


Would you agree on it if they only want to build their temple by not sharing it, rather destroy it?


I don’t support tearing down the Mosque al-Aqsa. I already said that they should not be allowed to do this. That wouldn’t change if it was a Christian structure instead of a Muslim structure. I’m not saying that we should let the Jews tear down the Mosque. I’m simply saying that their desire to do so is understandable and justifiable. Many orthodox Jews feel it’s a commandment form God to rebuild the temple. But, whatever the case, the Muslims don’t share their holy sites with other people.

The Jewish archeologists have repeatedly asked for permission to examine the tunnels beneath the Mosque al-Aqsa and the Muslims refuse. The Muslims won’t even let the Jews conduct prayer services on the Temple Mount.

Also, you should remember that only a minority of Jews want to rebuild the temple. Most Jews believe that it must be established by God, not man.

Finally, the Jews are the ones sharing the Temple Mount. The Muslims are the one’s who’re being selfish. They won’t even let the Jews dig NEAR the Mosque al Aqsa. They won’t let the Jews pray on the Temple Mount. Meanwhile there’s no comparable movement to push the Muslims away from the Wailing Wall, even though the Muslims have repeatedly taken the Wailing Wall away from the Jews throughout history.


I know, Israel police always preventing the orthodox Jews send the 'foundation stone' every year


Yes, the Temple Institute tries to place a stone block on the Temple Mount every year. Every year the Israeli police prevent them from doing so for the sake of creating peace.


If Israel government as the one who have a mandatory on the sites allowing Jews to build one


Why should the Israeli police prevent them from building if it’s not hurting anyone? Israel’s legal system doesn’t give the government that power. Now, they are stopping the Temple Institute from building the Temple on the Mosque al Aqsa. You just admitted that yourself. I thought you didn’t have a problem with the Jews building as long as they’re not tearing the temple down? Well, it’s the same concept. How can Israel justify stopping the Temple Institute from their research and replication? They can’t, that would violate their own legal system, because the government cannot sacrifice individual rights simply because Muslim extremists in Jerusalem do not believe the Jews have a right to replicate historical sites.




You think Israel governments do not help them?


Yes, I think that. As you said, when the Mosque al Aqsa comes down:


They'd the one who will be blamed by International communities, and the clash will once more happen. Maybe the biggest ever seen in Jerusalem modern history.


(A note to other readers: International Communities is, in this case, code for Arab/Muslim nations.)

As the politician said, Israel is interested in doing what’s easiest. Maintaining peace is easier than fighting a war. There is absolutely no evidence suggesting this secret Israeli conspiracy to help rebuild the temple. In fact, all evidence points to the contrary. Israel in word and action has done everything to prevent the Mosque al-Aqsa from being brought down. They’ve even ceded control of the Temple Mount to the Muslims and enacted Jim Crow like laws legitimizing prejudice restrictions of Jewish rights on a state level. All of this they did to keep the Muslims happy. In response the Muslims in this area continue to stone Jewish women and children for praying or simply getting too close.


Because Jews are not being considerate when it comes to praying

How do prayers hurt anybody? The Jews should have all the same rights as the Muslims, but they do not. The Muslims get to pray, get to conduct their religious services, on the Jewish holy site. Yet, when Jews try to do the same they get stoned.


Many excavation and construction being build within Al-Aqsa territory, not to mention the underground tunnel and such. Israel government wanted to help Jews secretly to not being seen for violating international laws.


There is absolutely no evidence of your accusation. There’s no underground Israeli conspiracy. That’s just your irrational hatred of Israel coming in. No matter what Israel does her motives are always questioned. Like I said, Israel could walk around giving out free pizzas and blow jobs and you’d say that it was a conspiracy against the Palestinians. Israel pulls out of Gaza, violating the rights of its own people, driving thousands of Jews from their homes, and bulldozing the homes of many more in Westbank and it’s a conspiracy. Israel sends food into Gaza and it’s a conspiracy. Conspiracy, conspiracy, conspiracy. Unless you can demonstrate clear evidence that Israel has had a direct involvement with any of these private functions your baseless claim is just another of the many absurd Muslim contrivances about how the Jews and Israel are constantly plotting against Islam and the Arabs.

There’s no reason they shouldn’t be allowed to excavate this historically significant site as long as they’re not damaging anything. The Muslims are being selfish. The Jews aren’t even allowed to dig tunnels near the Mosque? They’re not allowed to pray near the Mosque?


I've talk with another christian and they said Jerusalem is their holy land than Vatican, as Jesus were there to help Jerusalem citizens from robbery and other crimes. Well, I don't know which is right, though... Catholic or Protestant


Catholics are the Christian version of Shiites. Protestants are the Christian version of Sunni. The split is essentially the same. Catholics believe the Church officials are divinely appointed. Shiites believe that the Imams are divinely appointed. Protestants believe the word of God comes first from the bible then from the church. Sunni believe that the word of God comes from the Sura and that the scholars and imams only teach the words of God as delivered by Muhammad (PBUH.)


Yes, Al-Aqsa mosque it the 3rd holiest site in Islam. So, because it less 'holiest' than another, we could destroy it right away?


I didn’t say that. I simply pointed out that you were being dishonest. How many times must I repeat that I do not think the Mosque should be torn down. I just argued that precise point in another conversation IN THIS THREAD.

King Abdullah II had visited Jeruslam in 1910 if I'm not wrong



King Abdullah II had visited Jeruslam in 1910 if I'm not wrong. Saladin, the leader of Egyptian army gained control of Jerusalem and also Ottoman army came to Jerusalem or rather to Al-Aqsa mosque to pray there.


I may talk about this later.


It's not a dream. It's actually happened when Prophet fly from Madinah to Jerusalem in one night, then continuing his journey to receive the order of praying 5 times from God to muslims. That's arguable, but if it's not in Jerusalem, that's not make any difference


The Qur’an begs to differ. Chapter 17 verse 60 says describes it as a ‘vision.’ But your right, it doesn’t matter.


The point is, you can't build your holy place by destroying another religious place. That's common rule in every single Church, Synagogue, Temple or Mosque. What kind of tolerance the religions want to teach if they make it by simply ignoring another religion?


So, if Christians built a cathedral on the ruins of the Ka’bah and used the black stone to mount a crucifix and carved “Jesus is God,” into it, the Muslims would have no right to rebuild? And if the Christians then began stoning the Muslims who went there the Muslims would simply have to be more considerate about when and how they conduct the Haji, and they’d have to conduct it around the wishes of the Christians? And if they’d be intolerant and inconsiderate if they ever complained?

But again, I don’t think that the Mosque should be torn down. I think that the Muslims should stop stoning Jewish women and children for trying to pray. I think they should stop being zealots and trying to dominate and not let the Jews conduct their services. I think they should stop injuring tourists and Australian journalists in their attempts to murder Jews for PRAYING. Not for trying to tear the Mosque down, for praying.

That’s all they were doing. They gathered for Prayers.


There's no manifest destiny in Islam by destroying another religious place, moreover Jews.


The Muslims over there disagree. It is manifest destiny, quite clearly. It’s throughout the Arab/Muslim world. Remember when they tore down those Buddhist idols? How about when the Jordanians took over Israel? They systematically began destroying Mosques.


In history Muslims were getting along together with Jews more than with Christian. It because of 2 Muslims army and Empire being considerate to all religions in Jerusalem, then British came brought their gospel to make Jews and Muslims hating each other. Also for conquering purpose.


The Muslims were tolerant of everybody…who was doing what the Muslims wanted. The Jews were treated like second-class citizens. They were forbidden from praying and denied fundamental rights. They were discriminated against legally and socially. They even made them wear the star of shame, just like the Nazi in the 20th century. The Muslims were using this mark on Jews long before the Nazi.

During the Crusades the Jews were massacred by bother Christians and Muslims.

The British were peace keepers, they did not breed the animosity between the Jews and Muslims. The animosity was created by Zionists and Palestinian Nationalists. The British actually broke up and outlawed Jewish defence groups and banished al-Husayni after he started the race riots and massacres of the Jews.


I wouldn't say a nation. But a gathering of religious people of Jews because David and Solomon were there by teaching their 'One God' to pagan believer. In Islam, Jews is a religion that always being acknowledged for the first attempt to change Pagan believer to pray in 'One God'. As well as David and Solomon (Daud and Sulaiman in Islam) were also prophet in Islam. But then, Muslims came to Jerusalem as new religions and teach Jews to follow Islam as it is fixed religion with more rules in it.


The Muslims allowed the Jews to have their religion but not to spread it. They didn’t try to convert them but they penalized them for trying to teach it to their children or trying to convert Muslims. According to the Qur’an, they actually massacred large numbers of Jews for not supporting Muhammad (PBUH.)


Ask Muslims at that time, why they were being allowed to build Mosque from Jerusalem citizens. It's clear that Jerusalem citizens accepted Muslims as a new religion brought by Prophet


How am I supposed to ask them anything? They’re dead, but historically speaking they had no choice but to ‘accept,’ Islam.


After all, it's been destroyed. It's only a dust land if you don't make anything on it. Dome of Rock and Al-Aqsa are the only building remains there to make the holiest site not becoming eradicate of its holy image.


Remains of the temple remain intact today, including the platform which supports the Mosque al-Aqsa.


It's about acceptance. Of course, no Muslims will accept it if that happened. But Jews, or rather Jerusalem citizens accepted Muslims to build Al-Aqsa. Well, now we talk about different Jews, different citizens from past and present.


The Jews did not accept it. So, let’s pretend you’re right. The majority of the population in Jerusalem wanted to steal the mount from the Jews. So, if the majority of Jews in Jerusalem now want to steal the Temple Mount back from the Muslims should they be allowed to do so?


The problem is, Israel would never accept Hamas even when the election hasn't started yet. So no matter how much Hamas won by all Palestinians voice, they won't become a winner and won't has rights to authorize Palestinian as democracy works. What kind of democracy Israel or rather UN and US want to implement there?


A real democracy.


I've seen you video before and and I've explained it in Iran's Nuclear Ambition thread.


There’s no explanation. It’s right there on tape. They murdered a groom, beat his guests, and chased people down with cars. That’s unacceptable and it wasn’t the first time it happened. It happened twice in that month, and all because people disagreed with Hamas.

No wonder Hamas won the votes. You get run over by vehicles if you don’t support them. That’s tyranny, that’s terrorism not democracy. They control people with force and fear, that’s fascism.
Posted 10/29/09

Ryutai-Desk wrote:


DomFortress wrote:


Ryutai-Desk wrote:


Cool story as always.

Stones and Molotov? How about 44. Magnum caliber or 45 ACP shot to your head. Even you won't realized you already died until you arrive 'there'. That's what happening there. Could you tell me how to control a bloody chaos with such depression situation there? It it works, we could send it to Israel's official and Palestine government.

How the heck should I know? When I don't even use guns nor religion to cure my depression, because I find good old fashion physical activities did it for me.

Oh.


Okay... that's good for you.
However, I did not post here to talking about your personal life or something that very irrelevant to the matter. What's your suggestion to end the conflict there? With proper explanation and method, not by personal opinions.

You asked me how to deal with depressing situations, so I gave you what really worked for me; my personal empowerment by creating personal conflicts as personal fitness challenges. Which the states of Australia, Canada, USA, even UK have the same finding.

But can you guess who hadn't caught up with the rest of the world about depression? When both Israelis and Palestinians are victims of chronic depression, while private sectors like this and this are the closest things I can find about Israeli fitness programs.

I'm telling you about how to deal with conflicts caused by depression as truthfully as I can manage; by directly preventing and managing depression itself with fitness activities. However, there's nothing religious about my solution because it's based on modern science, not religion.
93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Ohigho
Offline
Posted 10/30/09
Personally I'm surprised that Mosque Al Aqsa wasn't torn down already, I cannot believe that is legitimately a "holy site" for Islam as much as a big middle finger to the Jews...

Its just another expression of a derivative religion trying to one-up its progenitor...
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 11/1/09

SeraphAlford wrote:


Yei wrote:


I think it says alot about the stupidity of human nature, especially when it comes to religion. So much conflict and political controversy over a little strip of land. As long as both the Muslims and Jews hold on to their fundamental beliefs that they are righteous and have God on their side and that the other side is inferior because of that, there can never be peace. The only solution here that I can see is to somehow hope that next generations on both sides will be more and more secular and eventually be able to identify with the other side.

Alot of them are already at that point, in one of my favourite documentaries "Promises" (a guy goes to Israel and talks to 7 Palestinian and Israeli kids and gets their opinions on everything, and in the end lets them meet each other and it made me cry), we see that the more secular kids on both sides think and want the same thing. But the more religious ones are absolutely insane and say they want the other side to just "disappear" and use religion to back everything they say.

As long as there's a majority of conservative extremists on both sides there won't be any hope, so the key I think is properly educating people there. Most Palestinian kids obviously aren't getting educated properly, and the conservative Jewish kids aren't any better.


I don’t think making them secular would solve the problem. The Zionist forces into Palestine were actually pretty secular and you believe that they still wanted to eradicate the Palestinians in order to create their Jewish state. I don’t agree but it makes my point quite clearly. It’s not just religion, though religion contributes in specific conflicts.

Secularism growing in the communities would have a positive influence, I think, on the region. But, I don’t think it’d make a real difference in the overall disagreement. Like I said in my other post, the secular Arabs and Israelis aren’t bickering about the Temple Mount. They are, however, bickering about Westbank. So, in this specific conflict your right. But in the greater conflict we need political action and a decrease in nationalism.

Fatah and many other forces contributing to this conflict are secular institutes encouraging secular views among their followers. The problem is that they replace it with nationalism. But, I think if we took away nationalism, which I think is worse than racism and more evil than any religion or lack thereof, and secularized the groups in question, and took certain steps…yeah, that would be our best hope for peace.

It is insane. Boggles my mind, really.


But what problem? The overall 'disagreement' between them? From what I've seen, the secular ones on both sides both can easily identify themselves with each other and get along, while the religious ones always see it as "this land belongs to the Jews/Muslims." What about the Westbank do they argue about exactly?

The actual political solution is irrelevant to what people's views are though, so I'm sure any disagreements they might have on the Westbank will be settled after international law is implemented. Even after the UN resolution is put into place and we have 2 states, the problems in Jerusalem will still continue, and it's for religious reasons.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.