Re: Israel

salaam,

aah, you must be new to the list.  this topic has actually come up many many
times before.   :-)

just a couple points:

in the analaogy, i think the indigenous nations of north america are more
acurately related to the palestininans rather than the zionists.  as they
both have had an imperialist colonial state imposed upon them.

also how do you mean that "What's interesting is that in both South Africa
and Israel, the people as a whole are far better off. "  do you mean to say
that the palestinians living in, for example, gaza refugee camps are better
off?

masalaama,

itrath


on 2/13/04 3:26 AM, y2 at [email protected] wrote:

> Salaams all,
> 
> Well this topic was bound to come up some time.    I'd just like to address
> a few points.  The first is why isn't so much attention paid to Kashmir or
> Kudristan...as there is to Palestine.  Well for one, its news.  Resistance
> or terror is news and the killing of a Jew means so much more to people in
> the main powers of the world such as the United States than some bomb blast
> in Pakistan or some Kurds being killed.  Its on the map, its a big issue.
> Jews were/are of the largest minority populations in the United states, and
> they had a cause.  It's expected that issues that affect them mean more than
> Rawandans or what not.
> 
> It is also essential to recognize the uniqueness of Israel's situation.
> Generally speaking, the rest of the conflicts mentioned are if you will
> run-o-the mill conflicts.  Kashmir is a disputed land between
> India/Pakistan...just another land problem.  The kurds have always been
> there...they're just treated very very poorly like the Aech in Indonesia or
> what have you.  I'm not trying to downplay these issues, but they're pretty
> standard fare around the world and in history.  The main thing these all
> have in common is: They're against a neighbour they've always known.
> 
> The situation in Israel is virtually unparalleled.  If, as you say they are
> maligned unfairly, they are surely treated unfairly in everyway...both good
> and bad.  No other group of people would have been able to create a state on
> land they haven't been the primary resistance on in 1000 years. The Native
> Indians aren't taking back Toronto anytime, I can tell you that.  A group of
> primarily European Jews decide to form the state of Israel long before WW2.
> Their campaign begins and early settlers arrive.  Then WW2 hits, and as a
> by-product of British colonialism, they formally declare the state of
> Israel.    More and more foreign Jews immigrate there.  A sustained effort
> to create a  state based on being Jewish on land occupied primarily by
> another people who do not share the same culture, language...And these
> people are supposed to accept their new rulers...yeah.  Sounds more like the
> British and Dutch going to South Africa and declaring themselves the rulers.
> While at the same time trying to create a white majority in the country.
> And this sustained effort to maintain Jewish majority in the land continues
> to day with the settlements and the belief that all Jews should end up in
> Israel right now.  This combined with being allied with the worlds most
> powerful nation, does create a rather unique situation.
> 
> What's interesting is that in both South Africa and Israel, the people as a
> whole are far better off.  South Africa is one of Africa's economic engines.
> And arab Israelis are decently well off financially.  Of course, all this
> has nothing to do with the morality of apartheid or Israel.
> 
> We're all too familiar with the plight of Jews in WW2 and what not.  As I'm
> sure we're all aware of other kinds of oppression...yet, these are
> foreigners doing the oppression, not the neighbour/family.  I'm sure we also
> know of the poor treatment of Palestinians by the other Arab countries, both
> before and after Israel.
> 
> As to the morality of say "terrorism/resistance" versus the constant
> persecution of the occupation.  Both are grave, but the Koran does offer an
> interesting perspective in chapter 2 (this chapter deals extensively with
> the correct use of force).
> 
> [2.190] And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do
> not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the
> limits.
> [2.191] And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence
> they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not
> fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if
> they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the
> unbelievers.
> [2.192] But if they desist, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
> 
> It's such a simple and direct passage.  This chapter also provides great
> mini quotes for those who wish to portray Islam as violent by not quoting
> entire section to provide perspective.  IT simply says that you can only
> fight those who fight against you.  And you should stop fighting when they
> stop fighting you.  The morality of the line comes in in 2.191 where it says
> "persecution is severer than slaughter"  This line is repeated elsewhere in
> the surah.
> 
> Yameen
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ProgressiveMuslims mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://willo.nitric.co.za/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progressivemuslims
>