Quote:
|
Originally Posted by guy44
we don't think as one monothilic group. Secondly, there is no deep-seeded anti-Muslim racism inherent in Judaism. Jews and Muslims have had their differences, but before the mid-twentieth century, the two lived alongside each other quite well for millenia. When Spain was ruled by the Moors, they allowed an extraordinary amount of religious freedom to Jews who had been actively persecuted by Christians for centuries. In fact, before the latest intifada began a few years ago, many Arabs lived in Israel, enough that over the next few decades they were expected to outnumber Jews. Does this sound like a country dedicated to removing Arabs from within its borders?
And as dumb as I think Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg may be, I think anyone who believes that this man speaks for any group of estimable size of Jews threatens his status as moron of the moment. I've never heard of him - his quote is just one crazy guy's statement cherry picked to look as if he spoke for more than just his Yeshiva.
Then, you insinuated that Jews consider killing non-Jews a good thing is repugnant beyond belief. Jews have always sued for peace throughout our troubled history. Whatever mistakes Israeli political and/or military leadership may have made over the last 50 years, it is utterly irresponsible and downright offensive to assert that Jews consider it a good thing to kill non-Jews.
One of our most sacred stories is that of Passover - you might know it as the one in which Moses leads the Jews out of Egypt. G-d parted the Red Sea to allow the Jews to pass, and when the Egyptian army attempted to follow, the Sea closed in upon them, drowning every soldier. The Jews initially began to celebrate, until G-d became angry. He told the Jews that every living creature on Earth is one of G-d's creatures, and that the death of the Egyptian army was a tragedy.
Our most tragic moment occurred about 60 years ago, when a country decided that to kill every member of another ethnic group was a good thing.
Do you actually believe that Jews would undertake that same quest?
Of course, you base your disgusting assertions on a "radical Zionist website" that is anything but. In fact, it is a radical racist website that refers to the treasured collected collection of Jewish theological thought, the Talmud, as Jewish Supremacist Hate Literature and decries the racial desegregation of America. Zionists are those who believed that Jews should return to the Holy Land and establish a state. White motherfuckers who dedicate their websites to "the cutting edge of legitimate, studious conspiracy research" in order to wax nostalgic about the good ol' slavery days are the opposite of Zionists.
I can't believe I'm having to explain to someone on these boards that a white supremacist is not a Zionist, and correct assumptions that Jews think killing anyone at all is a good idea. I feel like I'm this close to having to explain that our noses are not all hooked, that we don't run the world's banks, and that no, I've never tasted the blood of Christian children. I'm actually writing this post in genuine anger - I've never done that before. Unfuckingbelievable.
And KMA, I assure you that Islamic-Jewish relations are a bit more complicated than Jews being unable to forgive Muslims for "taking the holy land" in some mysterious event that didn't happen. Like I explained above, Jews and Muslims haven't always had bad relations. That is a relatively new development. Trust me - we Jews have been shuttling around various countries too long to hold some sort of permanent grudge against any one group. Jews have had a much worse history with Christianity than with Islam.
|
Thank you very much for saving me a lot of time typing this out. And for sparing me some anger, because I was becoming agitated while reading KMA's post. But it had more to do with the fact that I've already typed responses like yours out to posts like his elsewhere on this board.
In any case, I've quoted the thing because it probably needs to be reiterated. Maybe a few people will actually believe the sentiment contained within.
Oh, and no, lebell does not accurately portray the views of any of my muslim friends. My goodness, yes, I have muslim friends! There is a bit of agitation, some of it escalating into violence between us (well, not me in particular) on my campus, but that is between the people who get wrapped up in the political rhetoric. The religious wars belief is a very simple, seems to be mainly christian belief, way of making sense of a complex situation. It doesn't square with historical relations, however.
When you evaluated the relative timelines between the religions you made an error, now that I think of it attributed to the mistaken belief that any issues are predominantly religious, in linking ethnic heritage to a large number of muslim's religiousity. I mean to say that if you look deeper into the split between the two groups you'll find something very interesting. Lack of historic perspective on where the two derive their lineage could be overcome if christians would stop using the foundation of their religion as a convenient backstory when it suits them. By this I mean, read a bit more of what christians call the "old" testament and you'd find that even religious perspective on this isn't what it's purported to be (regardless of how you feel about the historical accuracy of the events depicted, at least that is what a number of religious groups are working from).