Islam, Arabs, invented Palestinians

Exploring blood-soaked roots of Arab feud - Salim Mansur
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/12/09/exploring-blood-soaked-roots-of-arab-feud

The Islamic calendar is based on the cycle of 12 lunar months and the first month, Muharram, in this Islamic year of 1433 began two weeks ago at the end of November.

The 10th day of Muharram, known as Ashura, is significant to Muslims and how it is commemorated sets them apart in a feud that goes back to the founding years of Islam.

This feud remains literally explosive and every Ashura, somewhere in the Arab-Muslim world — as happened this week in Kabul — fanatics among the majority Sunni Muslims set forth to kill members of the minority Shia Muslims.

This feud’s origin lies in an immense crime. It is the murder of Husain, the grandson of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, and born to his favourite daughter Fatima, married to Ali, his cousin.

Those responsible for this crime eliminated any claim on the part of Ali, and his sons — Hasan and Husain — to succeed Muhammad in leading the newly united tribes of Arabia under the flag of Islam.

The struggle over Muhammad’s succession began as his health failed and before his death in 632, the year 10 in the Islamic calendar. It divided the first generation of Muslims, led to wars, assassinations, and the murder of Ali and Hasan.

In 680, the year 61 in the Islamic calendar, Husain was invited by the people of Kufa in Iraq to join them, assume leadership among Muslims that was his by lineage, and represent the righteous order subverted by the existing ruler in Damascus.

Husain responded and with family and friends, around 100 in number, departed Medina for Kufa. But some 64 km ahead of the destination at Karbala, Husain’s caravan was blocked by an army under orders from Damascus.

Husain was ordered to surrender and recognize Yazid, son of Muawiya and grandson of Abu Sufyan — the most bitter foe of Muhammad — as the caliph in Damascus.

Husain was trapped. He chose to resist. Fighting broke out, and the male companions of Husain were killed.

Then finally on Ashura, Yazid’s army bore down upon Husain and decapitated him in the field of Karbala. His body was trampled upon by the cavalry that rushed him, his head removed and hoisted upon a spear, the female members of his family humiliated and bound as slaves, and taken, along with Husain’s head as a trophy, to Damascus.

Lesley Hazleton, in a recently published book After the Prophet: The Epic Story of the Shia-Sunni Split (2010), narrates this blood-chilling history. It should be read widely to understand the feud that remains explosive into our time among Muslims.

Hazleton’s narrative is based entirely on the most reliable accounts of the events by Muslim historians from the first and second century of the Islamic calendar. The most notable and respected of these historians is the man simply known as al-Tabari (838-923), and his voluminous account of the earliest years of Arab-Muslim history are the primary source of all subsequent writings about Islam’s early years.

For the vast majority of Muslims this history has been air-brushed, and there can be little understanding of Arab-Muslim politics without fully grasping what occurred on Ashura more than 13 centuries ago.

Gingrich calls Palestinians an "invented" people
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/09/us-usa-campaign-gingrich-idUSTRE7B823Z20111209

 

This has NOTHING to do with Palestinians.

 

What was the tilte again? Did you read all of it. How about this question: are you a convert or just an apologist & appeaser?

"Palestinians" outraged by Gingrich remarks
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/12/palestinians-outraged-by-gingrich-remarks.html

 

Newt is ridiculous.. People who lived in Syria-Palestine were called Palestinians.... whether they were Arab Christians, Arab Muslims or Arab Jews.

Arabs were living in Palestine and the Levant 2000 years before Islam.

Jerusalem was a whistle stop of the trade route between Dilmun and Babylon and between Egypt and Babylon..

 

Since, you didn't answer my question... I assume then... and the fact that you are limited about history. Yes there were Bedouins, Arabs, but no official borders.

When Israel defeated the Muslims during the embarrassing war that they lost, completely, the Israelis could have evicted all threats, but didn't.

Newt might have questionable traits and history, but he is not obtuse.

Many of the Palestinians can be considered Joradanians, Trans-Jordanians, but they were not all accepted. Better they remain and be a scapegoat.

Are you also aware that there was much land sold to the Jews by Arabs, because ti was pitiful in their mind?

 

There were no borders anywhere else in the world either.. Certainly NOT in America.

Do you know the difference between ARABS abd MUSLIMS? There were also settled Arabs.. not just bedouin..

But Arabs have been around for thousands of years before Mohammed was born.

And yes, Newt is obtuse.. He has a BA in modern European History.

The European Jews bought 6% of the land before 1948.

 

http://www.mapsofwar.com/images/EMPIRE17.swf

 

Your video is inaccurate because borders were extremely fluid over time.. However, Arabs were always part of the scene.. that is apparent because of the archeology, history and because of scripture.

There is so much more to the history of Syria-Palestine, Egypt, the Levant and Arabia than Jewish history.

 

And when did the Arabs become Muslims? What did the Muslims do to the Arab world?

Are you aware that few know that the Mongols conquered the Arab/Muslim worlds and for many decades there was peace. Of course, since the Mongols accepted all that subjugated and their religions, and many accepted Islam much later, because the interpreters were peaceful.

The Palestinians have had so many opportunities for peace and the good life, much better than their mediocrity. The Saudis are, frankly, no better since they rely on oil, rather than creative individualism to compete with porducts and services.

 

You mean when the Mongols conquered India?

The Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula traded with East Africa, Egypt, the Indus Valley and Babylon.. a thousand years before Islam.

Have you heard of Madain Saleh or Petra or the Marib Dam.... have you ever heard of the Christians of Najran.

The Saudis are doing quite well for themselves... but how would you know that?

 

The answer depends upon the thread, it changes each time.

 

LOLOL.. My heritage is Dutch and Irish.. When my family arrived here in the early 1600s we were Dutch Reform Church.. I am Christian by heritage, training and belief.

What does that have to do with the history of Palestine or the Middle East?

 

The Dutch like Muslims. I know of a Dutchman, who converted to Islam. So you are not sure what that has to do with Palestinians. There was a time of peace with the Jews, but that changed when Muhammad arrived, worse later when Islam was written and interpreted. You are aware that the Mulsim Palestinians want Israel off the map, much like the wacko Iranian. The leaders have never wanted peace.

There was a time when the Arabs appreciated the Jews, but, of course you know that. Right?

So explain to all why you are so pro everybody in the Middle East but Israel.

 

You do not enough history. The Mongols conquered far more than India, all of Persia and then some.

I have no problem with the histroy of the Arabs but I am not fond of Islam, or what the Muslims have done back then, and still continue with their medieval desires.

 

The first time I saw the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon I was quite young, so I have followed the story quite closely for over 60 years.. I used to listen to the radio broadcasts every night from the BBC, Radio Cairo, Voice of America about the endless small massacres in Lebanon and Syria.

Yes.. the Arabs did appreciate the Jews, but European Zionism undermined all that.

Before Muhammed the Jewish King of Yemen burned 2000 Najran Christians if you were referring to ancient times.. The Christian King of Abyssinia came to their rescue.. Protecting them later passed to Muhammed.

No one in my family has ever converted to Islam.. As I said we have been in America since the early 1600s..

 

Have you ever lived or worked anywhere in the Arab world?

 

Have you ever lived or worked anywhere in the Arab world?

What is the point you are trying to make? That I do not know or know enough, like you or others?

The fact is that the Egyptians, and Arabs were generally far better off without Islam, which is a derivative from Judaism, as is Christianity.

The Muslims were, and still are hateful of the wiser more edcuated Jews and the Egyptians and Romans back when there were the Alexandrine libraries. Muslims burned the libraries and most of the scrolls, because to them there was only one scroll, one book.

The Palestinians, Arabs, Trans-Jordanians, and so forth, would have been better being part of Israel. Part of democracy and either reforming the ideology of Islam, based on the Qur'an, the doctrine of the sword. However, since they procreate so much the Jews would have been concerned , because of the future votes. That is why, evidently, some say Islam is spreading around the world. "Spread out and procreate we wil outlast them."

I have studied the Midde East for over a decade, and have a list of contacts and sources who are quite formidable.

By the way, mention Chingis (or Genghis) Khan to Islamists or even moderate Muslims and watch their eyes and face. Usually, one can spot a nervous twitch or a grittier reaction.

The Muslims were almost taken off the map of the world. Since they subjugated, the Great Khan allowed them their routines, to a point, as long as the Mongols received their due from conquering. And what aggravates the Muslim historians is that Mongol women were warriors and commanders that could release arrows better than most of their inept warriors and mercenaries.

 

Gingrich's fresh hope
http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2011/12/gingrichs-fresh-hope.php

I have met Caroline Glick. It was brief but she has responded to my e-mails and I subscribe to her site. A brilliant and fiesty journalist and commentator.

 

Glick is playing headgames. Read the Palestine papers at Avalon Project: Yale.

 

It take an idiot to go along + believe an idiot like Newt.

O-James - Open your mind , read and learn from those who are far more educated + knowledgeable than a fat head like Gingrich :




or this :

Here is a fascinating review review by well known Israeli writer Tom Segev of a book titled, "When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?" (published by Resling in Hebrew). It is authored by Israeli historian Shlomo Zand. Prof. Zand teaches at Tel Aviv University. Segev writes "..in one of the most fascinating and challenging books published here in a long time. There never was a Jewish people, only a Jewish religion, and the exile also never happened - hence there was no return. Zand rejects most of the stories of national-identity formation in the Bible, including the exodus from Egypt and, most satisfactorily, the horrors of the conquest under Joshua. It's all fiction and myth that served as an excuse for the establishment of the State of Israel, he asserts."

I should add that this information and arguments have been around for a long time but it is nice to see it published in one of Israel's leading daily newspapers and presented in a book written by an Israeli historian.

Ed Corrigan


An Invention Called 'The Jewish People'By Tom Segev
Ha'aretz.com
2-29-8


Israel's Declaration of Independence states that the Jewish people arose in the Land of Israel and was exiled from its homeland. Every Israeli schoolchild is taught that this happened during the period of Roman rule, in 70 CE. The nation remained loyal to its land, to which it began to return after two millennia of exile. Wrong, says the historian Shlomo Zand, in one of the most fascinating and challenging books published here in a long time. There never was a Jewish people, only a Jewish religion, and the exile also never happened - hence there was no return. Zand rejects most of the stories of national-identity formation in the Bible, including the exodus from Egypt and, most satisfactorily, the horrors of the conquest under Joshua. It's all fiction and myth that served as an excuse for the establishment of the State of Israel, he asserts.

According to Zand, the Romans did not generally exile whole nations, and most of the Jews were permitted to remain in the country. The number of those exiled was at most tens of thousands. When the country was conquered by the Arabs, many of the Jews converted to Islam and were assimilated among the conquerors. It follows that the progenitors of the Palestinian Arabs were Jews. Zand did not invent this thesis; 30 years before the Declaration of Independence, it was espoused by David Ben-Gurion, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi and others.

If the majority of the Jews were not exiled, how is it that so many of them reached almost every country on earth?

Zand says they emigrated of their own volition or, if they were among those exiled to Babylon, remained there because they chose to. Contrary to conventional belief, the Jewish religion tried to induce members of other faiths to become Jews, which explains how there came to be millions of Jews in the world. As the Book of Esther, for example, notes, "And many of the people of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews fell upon them."

Zand quotes from many existing studies, some of which were written in Israel but shunted out of the central discourse. He also describes at length the Jewish kingdom of Himyar in the southern Arabian Peninsula and the Jewish Berbers in North Africa. The community of Jews in Spain sprang from Arabs who became Jews and arrived with the forces that captured Spain from the Christians, and from European-born individuals who had also become Jews.

The first Jews of Ashkenaz (Germany) did not come from the Land of Israel and did not reach Eastern Europe from Germany, but became Jews in the Khazar Kingdom in the Caucasus. Zand explains the origins of Yiddish culture: it was not a Jewish import from Germany, but the result of the connection between the offspring of the Kuzari and Germans who traveled to the East, some of them as merchants.

We find, then, that the members of a variety of peoples and races, blond and black, brown and yellow, became Jews in large numbers. According to Zand, the Zionist need to devise for them a shared ethnicity and historical continuity produced a long series of inventions and fictions, along with an invocation of racist theses. Some were concocted in the minds of those who conceived the Zionist movement, while others were offered as the findings of genetic studies conducted in Israel.

Prof. Zand teaches at Tel Aviv University. His book, "When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?" (published by Resling in Hebrew), is intended to promote the idea that Israel should be a "state of all its citizens" - Jews, Arabs and others - in contrast to its declared identity as a "Jewish and democratic" state. Personal stories, a prolonged theoretical discussion and abundant sarcastic quips do not help the book, but its historical chapters are well- written and cite numerous facts and insights that many Israelis will be astonished to read for the first time.

READ and Learn :


http://www.rense.com/general81/iuvnt.htm



....

 

Of course, Marlowe, we have all been invented. But you seem to be either anti-Israel-and-Jews, pro-Palestinians, Muslims and so forth. I have studied the Middle East, researched for a historical fiction novel, for over a decade and I have met notable authorities... hence, I have found that Islamic ideology is deceitful. The Qur'an is a doctrine of the sword, of course it depends on the intrepreter.

Then there are the academics and others who are anti-Jews, often because they are quite jealous that the Jewish people have won more awards and scholarly prizes per capita than just about every other religion and seculars...

And I suppose you are not a Churchill fan. Are you of the left, the labour party perhaps?

Churchill about Islam 1899

Sir Winston Churchill; (Source: The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50 London )

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.

Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."

"There is no greater mistake than to suppose that platitudes, smooth words, and timid policies offer a path to safety."

"An appeaser is one who feeds the crocodile hoping it will eat him last."

http://onwardjames.blogspot.com/2010/09/winston-churchill-never-never-never.html

 

What sort of sources did you use to study Islam or the Middle East. What notable authorities have you met?

http://www.politicalforum.com/middle-east/221895-pharaonic-inscriptions-found-arabia.html