lsbskins for President! Vote now!

[Yarn]

They may be wealthier, but we are talking about human rights, and on that basis those countries are abhorent. Turkey is far from perfect, but it is better.

[truthreality]

Here is what you said:



When confronted with the fact that this is a blatant falsehood, you replied with yet another blatant falsehood:



The 7th-century conquest of Palestine by the original caliphate is also not the most recent conquest of that area, but why should we expect any kind of historical accuracy from you?



Again, assuming that you're talking about the conquests of the original caliphate they are not the most recent invading force to conquer Palestine. And it isn't a straw man. As documented above, you specifically claimed that the Muslims exiled the Jews from the region, which is false. You then went on to claim that Muslims are "just as responsible as anyone else" for an event which occurred several hundred years before the Muslim religion even began. There isn't a lot to like about Islam but please don't let your hatred of it blind you to historical facts.



Oh, really? When did the Muslims claim that only Muslims could live there? And how do you figure they are responsible for stopping the Jews from returning?



The event to which your refer, which again is not the most recent conquest of the area, did not entail a large-scale exile of Jews, as that had already taken place five hundred years earlier. Again, your refusal to admit your mistake is causing us to waste time.



No, the settlements of Israeli Jews in Palestine. Ironically, what you've said applies to these illegal Israeli settlements more than it applies to the Palestinians. Your logic, that the Arabs are not native to the region (which in any case is false as the majority population after the Roman exile of the Jews were Arabs) and therefore don't have a claim to it, is absurd because by that logic the United States, let alone countries like Germany of England, has no right to any of its land. In fact, across the world it is difficult to find an example of even one nation populated by people who did not displace some earlier group of inhabitants. Europe, particularly, has seen several large-scale migration events.



Yes, but from the time of the original Caliphate beginning in the late 7th century AD until...oh...1945 or so the Muslims have unequivocally had a better record of dealing with Jews than Christians have.

The Islamic conquest of Israel/Palestine was the last conquest of Israel:

Middle Ages
In 635 CE, the region, including Jerusalem, was conquered by the Arabs and was to remain under Muslim control for the next 1300 years.[44] Control of the region transferred between the Umayyads,[44] Abbasids,[44] and Crusaders throughout the next six centuries,[44] before being conquered by the Mamluk Sultanate, in 1260.[45] In 1516, the region was conquered by the Ottoman Empire, and remained under Turkish rule until the 20th century.[45]

Can you name conquest that occurred after the event I cited above?

Regarding the exile of Jews from Israel the 1948 Arab–Israeli War and subsequent conflicts where the result of Jewish immigration to Israel.

The war is also considered one of the main triggers for the Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries.

1948 Arab

[Senor Hoint]

The Islamic conquest of Israel/Palestine was the last conquest of Israel:

In 635 CE, the region, including Jerusalem, was conquered by the Arabs and was to remain under Muslim control for the next 1300 years.[44] Control of the region transferred between the Umayyads,[44] Abbasids,[44] and Crusaders throughout the next six centuries,[44] before being conquered by the Mamluk Sultanate, in 1260.[45] In 1516, the region was conquered by the Ottoman Empire, and remained under Turkish rule until the 20th century.[45]

Let's see...since you named several conquest events rather than just one (as though "Islam" were a polity) the most recent you named was the Ottoman conquest. Ottomans, of course, are entirely different from Arabs, but let's just ignore that for now. Can you find one single example of a large-scale persecution of Jews by any of the states you named above which is worse than what Christians were doing at the same time?

Can you name conquest that occurred after the event I cited above?

Two. The conquest of the region by England after they broke up the Ottoman Empire after World War I. And then the conquest of the portion of the region not given to Israel by Israel since 1949.

[truthreality]

Let's see...since you named several conquest events rather than just one (as though "Islam" were a polity) the most recent you named was the Ottoman conquest. Ottomans, of course, are entirely different from Arabs, but let's just ignore that for now.

I explicitly used the word "Islam" from the start not "Arabs". Many "Arabs" are non-Muslim.

Can you find one single example of a large-scale persecution of Jews by any of the states you named above which is worse than what Christians were doing at the same time?

I am not really interested in arguing who is best at persecuting Jews because the discussion could go on forever. I will say that the Koran explicitly advocates the murder of Jews.

Two. The conquest of the region by England after they broke up the Ottoman Empire after World War I. And then the conquest of the portion of the region not given to Israel by Israel since 1949.

I knew you were going to bring up the British mandate. Britain gained control of Palestine and Israel with the authority of the league of nations and gave up power to Jews in Israel which can hardly be placed in the same category as the conquest and imperialism of the Muslims before.

[Senor Hoint]

I explicitly used the word "Islam" from the start not "Arabs". Many "Arabs" are non-Muslim.

I don't believe that it's valid to say that Islam conquered anything since Islam hasn't been a united polity since 661.

I am not really interested in arguing who is best at persecuting Jews because the discussion could go on forever. I will say that the Koran explicitly advocates the murder of Jews.

And so? The Koran, like the Bible or any other religious text is self-contradictory and highly allegorical, and also nearly 1500 years old. If you are not interested in who is more guilty of persecuting Jews why are you claiming that Muslims are specifically to blame? Why are you bringing up the fact that a great deal of anti-Semitism exists in the Arab world? I would argue that a great deal of tha anti-Semitism has been spurred by the conduct of the IDF.

I knew you were going to bring up the British mandate. Britain gained control of Palestine and Israel with the authority of the league of nations and gave up power to Jews in Israel which can hardly be placed in the same category as the conquest and imperialism of the Muslims before.

Really? They gained control of Palestine through the authority of the League of Nations? How do you think they "gained control" of a territory that had been in the Ottoman Empire, a formerly-powerful sovereign state? Through non-imperialistic, non-coercive means? Don't make me laugh.

[Yarn]

If coercive seizure of land is conquest, Israel is still conquering Palestine.

[truthreality]

I don't believe that it's valid to say that Islam conquered anything since Islam hasn't been a united polity since 661.

Muslim conquests began with Muhammad the founder of Islam.

And so? The Koran, like the Bible or any other religious text is self-contradictory and highly allegorical, and also nearly 1500 years old. If you are not interested in who is more guilty of persecuting Jews why are you claiming that Muslims are specifically to blame? Why are you bringing up the fact that a great deal of anti-Semitism exists in the Arab world? I would argue that a great deal of tha anti-Semitism has been spurred by the conduct of the IDF.

Muslim countries tend to be far more intolerant then Christian countries in regards to other groups.

Really? They gained control of Palestine through the authority of the League of Nations? How do you think they "gained control" of a territory that had been in the Ottoman Empire, a formerly-powerful sovereign state? Through non-imperialistic, non-coercive means? Don't make me laugh.

The Ottoman Empire dissolved after they fought against the allies in World War 1. The League of Nations and England took over a destroyed empire without a government.

[Darklordabc]

Why are you bringing up the fact that a great deal of anti-Semitism exists in the Arab world? I would argue that a great deal of tha anti-Semitism has been spurred by the conduct of the IDF.

"I would argue that a great deal of anti-semitism in nazi germany is spurred on by the conduct of Jewish bankers"
As if, its a fair response for me to hate all Chinese people because of what the Chinese government is doing. But we are supposed to belive that these muslim peasants are justified in wanting the genocide of all jews, because of the action of the IDF.
I suggest you go to Middle East Media Research Institute - YouTube, which translates Arabic tv into english. They are constantly talking about how Jews are pigs, animals, cancers, with lots of mentions of the Koran to back it up.
Don't try to shift the blame for these savages onto the victims of their bigotry, their views are completely contemptible and deserve nothing more then total condemnation for them.

[grandpa]

I don't think that fact is important in this discussion.
America supports lots of regimes and countries, and there doesn't
seen to be a correlation between the countries they support
and misogyny.

If it weren't for American support, or US involvement in general, some of these regimes might not even exist.

Grandpa h.

[grandpa]

"I would argue that a great deal of anti-semitism
in nazi germany is spurred on by the conduct of
Jewish bankers."
As if, its a fair response for me to hate
all Chinese people because of what the Chinese government is
doing.

I wouldn't say it's "fair," but if the Chinese government claims to represent all Chinese people, some people are likely to fall for that claim. Such is the folly of nationalism, be it in China or Israel.

If I'm going to debate with you intelligently, you will have to understand that point.

A lot of claims of "anti-semitism" are just ways of attacking critics.
Some groups simply must attack any critics.
A comparative example:
"Presentation of the Alternative Charlemagne Award to Robert S. Minton
will occur ten days after a jury sided with the Scientology
opponent when he said assault charges filed against him by organization
members were spurred not by misconduct on his part as he picketed
Scientology's Florida headquarters last November, but by his accusers'
own organizational policies towards its critics. In related news, Swiss
Scientology opponent Odette Jaccard has been nominated for the 'Prix
Courage.'"
Scientology opponent survives charges, wins award - alt.support.ex-cult | Google Groups

Every sports team is number one, and every nation is one of
the strongest nations in history. It's propaganda.

Grandpa h.

[Senor Hoint]

Muslim conquests began with Muhammad the founder of Islam.

Again, just lumping all conquests by people who happened to be Muslims doesn't work, since you apparently mistook a series of six conquest events for a single conquest. If you say "Muslim conquests" it is generally understood that this refers to the Rashidun caliphate, which was the last time Islam was united in a single polity. Also the fact that Christians reconquered the area (I might add they shocked the tolerant Arabs by massacring the non-Christian inhabitants of Jerusalem, an action which Saladin did not reciprocate on retaking the city) makes it even less valid to say that the last conquest of the area was "the Muslim conquest."

Muslim countries tend to be far more intolerant then Christian countries in regards to other groups.

Yes, that's true...now. I repeat that there is a perfectly valid materialistic explanation for this that has nothing to do with the particular holy book followed in this part of the world. When the Muslim world was the center of culture, trade, and civilization, it was far more tolerant than Europe, a relatively primitive backwater, was at the same time. Now Europe and the United States are the centers of culture and trade.

The Ottoman Empire dissolved after they fought against the allies in World War 1. The League of Nations and England took over a destroyed empire without a government.

While the Ottoman state had been in decline, they ended the war in better shape than most European nations. Their empire was destroyed by the victors. The same thing happened to Austria-Hungary and the German Empire. If you can't see World War I as an example of "to the victor the spoils," it's even more naive than when you said Vietnam was a war for moral reasons. World War I was a war fought between empires for imperialistic reasons.

[truthreality]

Again, just lumping all conquests by people who happened to be Muslims doesn't work,

If there were not such a trend of Islamic imperialism then I would agree with you but this is not the case.

If you say "Muslim conquests" it is generally understood that this refers to the Rashidun caliphate, which was the last time Islam was united in a single polity.

The Rashidun caliphate was created after the death of Muhammad. Muhammad, however, engaged in conquests himself so I would argue that the Rashidun caliphate was inspired by Muhammad.

Also the fact that Christians reconquered the area

Yes power did transfer between Islam and Christianity as the result of the Crusades but the Crusades happened in 12th and 13th centuries. The final conquering of Israel was by the Ottoman Empire in the 16th century. The Crusades were partly a response to the calls of the Byzantine Empire for help fighting against the expansionist Muslims who persecuted Christians and prevented them from immigrating to Israel.

(I might add they shocked the tolerant Arabs by massacring the non-Christian inhabitants of Jerusalem, an action which Saladin did not reciprocate on retaking the city)

Good point. I agree.

makes it even less valid to say that the last conquest of the area was "the Muslim conquest."

The last empire to conquer Israel was an Islamic empire.

Yes, that's true...now. I repeat that there is a perfectly valid materialistic explanation for this that has nothing to do with the particular holy book followed in this part of the world. When the Muslim world was the center of culture, trade, and civilization, it was far more tolerant than Europe, a relatively primitive backwater, was at the same time. Now Europe and the United States are the centers of culture and trade.

I agree there have been tolerant Muslim rulers. Akbhar in India is a good example. The Quran is the centerpiece and inspiration for Islam. Without the Quaran there is no Islam. Differentiating the Quaran from Islam makes no sense as Islam does not exist without the Koran or Hadith or other Islamic scripture. Their beliefs are molded by scripture.

While the Ottoman state had been in decline, they ended the war in better shape than most European nations. Their empire was destroyed by the victors. The same thing happened to Austria-Hungary and the German Empire. If you can't see World War I as an example of "to the victor the spoils," it's even more naive than when you said Vietnam was a war for moral reasons. World War I was a war fought between empires for imperialistic reasons.

The Ottoman Empire joined World War 1 under their own free will. The Allies did not invade the Ottoman Empire with the intent of conquering.