Enemy's enemies are your friends - jews and Christians, unlikely friendship

[sooda]

More like 163 and due to Western pressure.

Samuel Untermyer declared war on all things German from the safety of Madison Square Garden in 1933.

 

[Shad]

Augustus, you're just not a credible source on this stuff, Tax on Muslims is much higher than non muslims

He provided evidence while you provide what exactly?

 

[sooda]

One of those quotes was from the interview itself not 1920.

The article was written in 1920.. You didn't bother reading it, did you?

 

[Shad]

Samuel Untermyer declared war on all things German from the safety of Madison Square Garden in 1933.

You quoted the wrong post.

What is your point?

 

[Shad]

The article was written in 1920.. You didn't bother reading it, did you?

I read it. Do note I provided a link to one of the quotes specifically the question. That was an interview in 96 of the author. You linked an article with no point behind it.

 

[sooda]

I read it. Do note I provided a link to one of the quotes specifically the question. That was an interview in 96 of the author.

Missed that. Please repost.

 

[Shad]

Samuel Untermyer raised millions of dollars in the US for the "starving Jews of Europe"... Its no surprised that they turned to socialism ...

Early Zionist pioneers who established the state of Israel were socialists — they established farming collectives called kibbutzim which not only shared wages but sometimes even shared children —, very few kibbutzim still exist or share that economic model.

So?

 

[Shad]

Missed that. Please repost.

Text in bold

Enemy's enemies are your friends - jews and Christians, unlikely friendship

 

[Lyndon]

He provided evidence while you provide what exactly?

He provides nothing but a strong religious bias against anything Islam, as Sooda is pointed out his bias is no accurate.

 

[Shad]

He provides nothing but a strong religious bias against anything Islam, as Sooda is pointed out his bias is no accurate.

Babble. You provided zero evidence so just smear due to lack of an argument. Yawn.

 

[Lyndon]

Pretty much the same as the inaccurate info you present in these threads.

 

[Augustus]

There have been no dhimmis for more than 200 years.

After the Burnings of Najran Muhammed waived Jizya to protect the Christians.

More like 2 years as there were under ISIS.

Anyway, that's largely irrelevant to whether or not there were any problems at various points over the last 1400 years. And there have been problems in the last 200 years, and that includes the 19th C so can't be blamed on Israel.

We shouldn't judge the past through an anachronistic lens of contemporary morality, but we shouldn't sugar-coat it either. History wasn't all sweetness and light where benevolent paragons of virtue loved religious and cultural minorities and respected them as equals (let alone giving them preferential treatment).

It's like when people point to Jews/Christians in positions of power as evidence of 'tolerance' in a modern sense. One of the main reasons minorities were put into positions of power was that they were no threat as their status was entirely dependent on their Muslim patron. They could not possibly hope to usurp power and rule in their own right.

 

[sooda]

Text in bold

Enemy's enemies are your friends - jews and Christians, unlikely friendship

Russian and European refugees seeking sanctuary in Palestine turned on the native inhabitants and took their homes, farms, water sources and civil rights.

 

[Shad]

Russian and European refugees seeking sanctuary in Palestine turned on the native inhabitants and took their homes, farms, water sources and civil rights.

They were fighting well before that. Right of conquest exists regardless of the UN says.

 

[sooda]

They were fighting well before that. Right of conquest exists regardless of the UN says.

You should be ashamed.

 

[Shad]

You should be ashamed.

I am stating a fact not endorsing it. The UN has zero power. Laws which can not be enforced are useless. Both sides killed each other. Both sides deprived others of their so-called rights. One side won the civil war. The rest is history.

Most nation-states were built on the right of conquest.

 

[Augustus]

He provides nothing but a strong religious bias against anything Islam, as Sooda is pointed out his bias is no accurate.

I love RF. In one thread I get called a Muslim for offering a well evidence opinion that goes against someone's biases, and in another thread I get called a fanatical Islam hater for offering a well evidence opinion that goes against someone's biases

Again, why should anyone trust that you have the slightest clue who is right on this issue? You certainly don't know anything yourself, so how are you judging who is right and who is wrong? How are you deciding who is biased? Can you make a rational case, as so far you just bleat some ad hom nonsense.

I'm the only one who offered any scholarly evidence on the issue (including quotes from primary sources). Of course you dismiss this out of hand as you are an ideologue.

Me: "Well Muslims were on average less hostile to Jews than Christians were including some periods of relative harmony. I'm not sure 'got along well' is entirely accurate."

Lyndon: OMG! you have a strong religious bias against Muslims! Anyone who says Jews weren't treated wonderfully in the Medieval Muslim world is an Islamophobe. They paid less tax! I know because someone said so on the internet while offering zero evidence in support. It made me feel good though so I chose to believe it.

 

[Lyndon]

One side invaded a country and took over, that's not right. Of course Shad would say Hussein had a right to take over Kuwait by the same logic, but its still wrong.

 

[Shad]

I love RF. In one thread I get called a Muslim for offering a well evidence opinion that goes against someone's biases, and in another thread I get called a fanatical Islam hater for offering a well evidence opinion that goes against someone's biases

So self-hating Muslim revert! Gotcha.

 

[Shad]

One side invaded a country and took over, that's not right. Of course Shad would say Hussein had a right to take over Kuwait by the same logic, but its still wrong.

You are conflating stating a fact with endorsing it. Has any nation done anything of substance to correct it? (and won) No. Has the UN's army rushed to liberate the area? No. Idealist vs reality. Have you rushed to join the liberation of the area? No.