NationStates Jolt Archive

My so-called "Dhimmitude" is no reason for my mentioning of Irgun massacres. Did I say that they made matzoh-balls or whatever? Trust me, I'm not gullible. Anyone can twist the meaning of an event, and you seem to do a wonderful job of it as well as your extremist adversaries.
It is disgusting to claim that, as well as it is risque to believe the killings were Holocaust. They happened, they were a product of a segment of (was-to-beborn) Israeli society -and not all of it- and were acts similar to those of the SS firing-sqads, still at the stage when these were similar to a Katyn or a Russian pogrom, and not roads to Auschwitz (horrible, but still "Final Solution"-less crimes agains humanity). They WERE part of a drive to push the uncomfortable Palestian CIVILIANS out of craved territories. See my previous post were I quote Chaim Weizmann, see the Israli admittance of "gettoisation", see the convincing effects that these had in driving them out of Palestine. By God, I don't think these come as news to you.
I did not quote Hamas or even the PLO on these. Everywhere but in biased Israel, they are admitted fact.

Thank you for your concern about who is to dominate my people, Yeru Shalaim, but I assure you you missed (or pretended to miss) my point.
I guess I have to stress the obvious: there is no common pan-Islamic action, be it good or evil. I am ready to admit all the evils, on all sides - and my points about the Ottomans are as follows:
-they had ideologically diverse sources, even contradictory ones: their drive to replace the Byzanthenes led them to give an identity to Orthodoxy, as paradoxical as that may look. It turned them from a religious manifest of the power of Emperors into a Church on its own - remember that the last emperor had approved a union with the Roman Church, and most of Easterndom was in revolt against this gesture. The Sultan approved a much more liberal connection with the Patriarchate, thus giving it a voice of its own. The Russians were quick to profit on this, and their claim to be the Third Rome was in defiance of the seat in Istanbul - a thing that nobody will admit to today. It doesn't make the Ottomans protectors, other than by coincidence. Fact is they assumed the functions of the Empire.
- the Islamic legacy they had was virulently challenged by many states and policies, from the Sefavids to the Wahhabis. The inner wars were much bloodier than those on Russia (or Serbia, or whatever), and they implied that the truth was, and is, this: "nobody has a monopoly on religion" (the Caliphs in Istanbul were considered pagans by the Wahhabies - also, by any standards, the Islam preached in Turkey was cosmopolitan and ecclectic, which is why Islamists in Turkey today will not hold it a paradigm).
Also, giving thumbs-up for Russian instigation in Serbia is in bad taste for an Israeli: Russia was, for the very same reasons, carrying out major pogroms in the Ukraine.
- bloody wars in the Balkans took a religious form at the instigation of foreigners (previously, Christians could just as well find common ground with the Ottomans, and Hungarian Protestants in Transylvania were in an alliance with the Ottomans against Rome - and the Hungarian Crown! given that it was Catholic); in the XIXth century, nationalists in the Balkans were violently turning on each other - this ferocity had NOTHING to do with the Ottomans (previously, the Turks had been forced to break up the system of religious corporatism in their society, because Christian "brothers" would not want to be included in the same classes - that is why the first acts of independent Balkan nations were wars on each other, given that they had superimposing identities, as it happened in Serbia vs. Bulgaria; incidentally, identities were mostly non-religious, even secular - see Albania and its Moslem-Christian population, as well as Yougoslavia after WW1)


I would say that you are ready to admit a great many evils against my side of this conflict that are untrue. I would also say that you are willing to overlook, tone down or otherwise excuse a great many evils on the part of Moslems.

Let us start at your end, with “Albanians”. These are a people who Hitler enlisted against the Serbs, a job they did happily because the Serbs were Christian. Now if you spoke of Armenians, you would speak of Christians that were victims of an Ottoman Genocide, again because they, like the Serbs, were Christians. To this day, the Turks recognize their part of neither sin.

Whether Islamic Rulers recognize the legitimacy of each other or not, they all recognize Islamic Superiority and they will all press outward first. If the Wahabi opposes the Turk, it is because the Turk has in his conquest, placed himself between the Wahabi and you.

“The enemy of my enemy is my friend”. This is why some various Christian and even Jewish parties have sought refuge or alliances amongst Moslems. It is a temporary thing contingent upon many factors, a less of two evils, a Dhimmi that is tolerated until he is no longer useful and host that may be useful in defense against or as a weapon against a European Rival. Nothing more. It of course helps, if the momentary ruler is a relative atheist for whom his religion means little. A royal may sell his loyalty, but he can not sell the faith of his people so easily. The Turkish Government today still tolerates a small Jewish Population, but the Turks still seek our deaths. A weaker government would never be able to stay their hands. Sadly, peace between India and Pakistan, rest solidly on the shoulders of a man who has no religion, but rules one of the most radical Moslem populations in the world.

There is an article today in the Jerusalem Post, about one of the most obviously “Wrong” photographs ever disseminated by the Associated Press. This famous photograph is still circulating online and the Palestinian Authority still uses it, though the Associated Press eventually retracted its statement when the boy’s Jewish Father wrote them to complain. This is photograph of a bloody young man kneeling in front of a screaming, club wielding, IDF Soldier. This was falsely claimed to be a “Palestinian at the Temple Mount being beaten”. It was in fact, a young Jewish student after escaping being lynched by more than forty Arabs. This bloody young man was flown back to America to recover his health and his ability to walk. He just moved back to Israel.

Something is to be said for this situation, in which the press rushes to crank out such an obviously fraudulent piece and even when retracted, the world rails on about it. There is something to be said, for how exactly each “Faction” deals with this sort of data. It is too easy to accept the Politically Correct and rose colored version of Islamic History, but takes a more cynical, hard line stance to evaluate the situation accurately.

The truth about Islam is that it doctrinally mandates an eventual conquest of everything. It calls upon its followers to dominate, by force or cajoling or any other means necessary. They are not obligated to convert you, just supplant you. Converting however would be better for your health, considering what being supplanted implies. Moslems fight infidels on not just a few borders, they fight on every border and when violence breaks out it is not just a few Moslems who are rampaging in the streets, but outright mobs. The Christian Bible is put in a state sponsored art exhibit in New York featuring such delicate administrations as maggot infested animal heads and “Virgin Marys” of elephant dung and a few televangelists complain. A false rumor is circulated by a reporter of “The Koran being Desecrated” in prisons and hundreds die when Moslems across the globe riot.

The problem is endemic, built in to the very fabric of Islam and regular as clockwork. It must be addressed as what it is, an ideology as dangerous as any has ever been.

I continue to support the rights of Serbia to defend themselves long as they have the backbone to do so.
Let me be VERY clear:
This is tragic. Your support for such nationalists in Europe is pathetic. The only reason that anti-Semitism is no longer a major theme in their speeches (as opposed to the very same ideology 60 years ago) is because the Nazis and then Sionism have made this part of the continent virtually "Judenfrei".

You are NOT supporting Serbia, but rather the followers of the Chetniks in "Serbian Bosnia" and "Serbian Kosovo". Chetniks! You know what they thought of the Jewish population? Them and their national-communist cronies, a man like Milosevic who became a nationalist so that he wouldn't lose power, and for this reason only unleashed hell upon the Earth (to begin with, not against the Moslems - but in Slovenia and Croatia). Make sure you know that Bosnia's was the population most loyal to Yugoslavia, but not to Greater Serbia, as Moslems were victims of any other community. And still, the man who defended Sarajevo in the siege was a Serb national!
Serbia-proper has had an allergic rection to Mr. Milosevic. Sadly, they took their time getting around to doing it.
And in Kosovo, the grievances were purely "national". Again, Serbian extremists had a grievance with Albanians - the Moslem, Christian Orthodox, Catholic, and atheists that they are.

The Armenian genocide was a contribution of NATIONALISM and the mentality of a YOUNG TURK, secular movement that it should save face in front of the Allies, by getting rid of a "fifth column" (in a sense, and not to excuse! the Armenians were that, as the map of short-lived 1918 Armenia can clearly show); it is the same as Turks on Kurds ever since - and Kurds are Moslem!
At the same time, the Ottomans were facing a large-scale, messianic and British-trained Moslem Arab force (in the very territory where you live, by the way).
And still at the same time, Russia was involved in victimising all of its Jewish population. Still, it was in the same line: a scape-goat.

The Ottomans had not been doing that to the Jews previously! (How come? It went on for 500 years!) In fact, Spain got static from other Christians, in the XVth-XVIth century, for getting rid of a Jewish population with all the savoir-faire, one that was aiming straight for the arch-rival, the Ottomans. This is not just "my enemy's enemy's is my friend": it is the fact that the Ottomans did not feel threatened.
It happened for a while in Moldavia, with the expulsion from Poland. Except here the Moldavians (later, Romanians) "wised up" against the "enemies of Christ", and, soon, we had a "Jewish problem" we wanted to get off our backs. That meant that Jews were victimised, even though most were living in abject poverty (ulike the Ottoman Empire, where they were allowed - if not encouraged - to have careers and trades).

The truth about Islam is that it doctrinally mandates an eventual conquest of everything. It calls upon its followers to dominate, by force or cajoling or any other means necessary. They are not obligated to convert you, just supplant you. Converting however would be better for your health, considering what being supplanted implies. Moslems fight infidels on not just a few borders, they fight on every border and when violence breaks out it is not just a few Moslems who are rampaging in the streets, but outright mobs. The Christian Bible is put in a state sponsored art exhibit in New York featuring such delicate administrations as maggot infested animal heads and “Virgin Marys” of elephant dung and a few televangelists complain. A false rumor is circulated by a reporter of “The Koran being Desecrated” in prisons and hundreds die when Moslems across the globe riot.

The problem is endemic, built in to the very fabric of Islam and regular as clockwork. It must be addressed as what it is, an ideology as dangerous as any has ever been.
Yes, let's be hypocritical! The fact that I (for example) do not care as much about the Christian Bible is prescribed by Christianity? Is it more Christian not to care? Don't get me started about the religious ambiguity of Christian beliefs and actions! Let me just stress that many Christians would be just as violent (before we all remember the now unpopular Christian belief that you're infesting the world with plague and eating the flesh of our infants).
Even more so, many people getting killed does not imply many (or more) killers! Otherwise, all of Europe should have to account for the Shoah.

Hell, how am I to take these statements from the citizen of a country that was created on the basis of religious texts (even though nobody checks how many of your fellow-nationals are believers, even though Judaism is as vast a domain of religious beliefs as Christianity from Adventist to Monophisite to Alaskan Orthodox)?
These are a people who Hitler enlisted against the Serbs, a job they did happily because the Serbs were Christian.
This is classic twistory and bigotism. The Albanian organizations were secular, representing several religions (including Marxism, if you will), and taking up arms AGAINST the Germans after the fall of Italy (even, if not especially, the Albanian fascists - look into it).
The Serb Chetniks were the ones in a loving relationship with the Reich - even though they started by opposing it. They were in competition with Tito - and the UK had stopped backing them at all. Tito was pro-YUGOSLAVIAN, (himself a Croat), and pathetic succesors of the Chetniks have been accusing him of debilitating Serbia. Him! the only one who did not compromise with the Nazis! (Remember that some of the crimes Draja Mihailovic was executed for were against the Jews...)

And maybe I have not been clear about this: Albanians ARE Christian, and Moslem - and Albania was, later, the only officially atheist state ever.