Always amazing to me that people prefer to believe in shadowy conspiracy theories about Jews, rather than listen to what Islamic extremists have been publicly saying, publishing, and broadcasting for the last 100 years. You don't have to like Israel or Jews, but if you think Hamas or the ideology they represent are the good guys in ANY equation, you are very sadly mistaken.
Always amazing to me that people prefer to believe in shadowy conspiracy theories about Jews, rather than listen to what Islamic extremists have been publicly saying, publishing, and broadcasting for the last 100 years. You don't have to like Israel or Jews, but if you think Hamas or the ideology they represent are the good guys in ANY equation, you are very sadly mistaken.
I published that Oct 8th. The day after. I knew what it was from the start because I don't watch CNN and don't belive what governments tell me and didn't start paying attention to all this yesterday. Who funds Hamas? Who is on record saying they need to keep funding Hamas? Who formed Hamas to undermine the PLO and two state solution? Who removed soldiers from that portion of the fence the week before and sent them to the west bank? Cui Bono from the false flag? How? All governments derive their power from enemies. If they can't find them, they create them and manufacture them and will not hesitate to sacrifice their own people in the process. This is all well documented Alex. You can choose to ignore it and whine about "conspiracy theories" but don't expect honest people who care about truth to respect you for it.
So you jumped to an immediate conclusion with zero evidence, based on your existing biases, and now you cherry pick whatever you can find to support your predetermined conclusion. But you say you "care about the truth." Got it.
If you care about the truth, look into the actual history of Hamas. Yes, Netanyahu had an ill-advised policy of supporting Hamas in order to keep the Arab factions divided. But by no stretch of the imagination did Israel create Hamas. It was a direct offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, which was founded in the 1920s, when "Palestine" - including the modern state of Jordan - was still a British colony.
Hamas along with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) is and was resistance fighters...fighting an apartheid regime that is brutal, sadistic, and bent on the genocide of the Palestinian people...are they being abused and used, probably...what fighting machine isn't used and abused by the Globalist. The fact that ethnic cleansing is happening should haunt all of us for we are in the middle of a culling.
"So you jumped to an immediate conclusion with zero evidence, based on your existing biases..." Good description of the allegations of rape and mutilation by Hamas. (If those things had actually happened the world would have been subjected to 24/7 replay of it for 9 months now.) Israelis have been presumed to be noble and truthful and eternal victims since 1948; that people are finally questioning that narrative is sticking in many a craw at the moment. It must be especially galling that so many Jewish people are out there protesting the barbaric behavior of the Israelis and their Apartheid system. You can keep on gaslighting but, with all due respect to PT Barnum, it seems that since October 7th there is one less sucker every minute of this genocide.
"So you jumped to an immediate conclusion with zero evidence, based on your existing biases..." Good description of the allegations of rape and mutilation by Hamas.
Good description of the allegation that Osama bin Laden committed 9/11 too, another event which CJ (an author I previously respected) apparently believes happened precisely as we have been told.
Wow. You're actually denying that Hamas terrorists raped and mutilated their victims on October 7? I guess if the extensive first-hand testimony, photographic and video evidence, coroner's reports, and even the conclusion of an investigation by the notoriously anti-Israel United Nations didn't convince you, nothing I could say would possibly make a difference.
And here you have it: apologists for Israel invoke horrific acts supposedly committed by Hamas but go silent when asked for proof. They expect everyone to be cowed by their wild, unfounded statements (and, presumably, the threat of being called "anti-semitic" for questioning Zionist BS), so they keep throwing out there whatever the hell they want, no matter how debunked. I get it though, what with genocide being so hard to defend. Must be hard to hold a position so minority that literally millions of people around the world take to the streets to denounce it. Why they can't bring themselves to finally come over to the side of truth and decency is beyond me.
Always amazing to me that so many people who comment on Israel and Hamas donтАЩt know that Hamas was created by Israel, and is still run by Israel. Yes, many or perhaps most of the Hamas fighters are Muslims who hate Jews and Israel, but they are just clueless useful idiots who are unknowingly working for Israel while thinking they are attacking Israel. Just ask yourself who benefitted from the 10/7 attack. Certainly not the 130,000 dead Palestinians, many of whom were children.
Technicality: Hamas was not created by Israel, but yes funded by Israel. Back in 1987 BEFORE Hamas was a terrorist org., Israel made the totally butt-headed tactical error of fundin' Hamas thinkin' it would be a clever move to split up the potentially united "Palestinian" front--b/c Hamas was a religious-not-political group (they wanted ta kill the joos but not "for territory"--just on "religious grounds") -- an' again, at the time Hamas had not been terrorist. Thus Israel thought it was a safer "bet"--better than fundin' the PLO (which was political in aim AND territorial)
Boy golly were they wrong---an' I'll add that however fatal an' dumb a decision that was--Israel didn't actually create Hamas (or Isis fer that matter either--folks are sayin' Israel created "them all"...) So yup, it's amazing that some folks think Israel created Hamas an' don't know the backstory (embarrassin' as it is...with fatal results).
You have your shoes on the wrong feet...Israel is a terrorist organization...Hamas is a rag tag band of resistance fighters fighting for their homeland...
What you wrote looks like a prime example of a limited hangout.
тАЬArticle 31 Describes Hamas as тАШa humanistic movementтАЩ, which тАШtakes care of human rights and is guided by Islamic tolerance when dealing with the followers of other religionsтАЩ. тАШUnder the wing of IslamтАЩ, it is possible for Islam, Christianity and Judaism тАШto coexist in peace and quiet with each otherтАЩ provided that members of other religions do not dispute the sovereignty of Islam in the region.тАЭ [1]
Oh, well, it's alright then. As long as non-Muslims "do not dispute the sovereignty of Islam in the region," accept their dhimmi status and pay the jizaya tax, then peace reigns supreme! Unless, of course, you want human rights of any kind.
The fact that some people hate Jews so much that they are willing to become apologists for Islamic extremism still surprises me. I don't know why though ... When queer, purple-haired college girls in the USA are cheering for Iran, where women are tortured and killed for going outside with their hair uncovered, it's clear that reality has no bearing on people's opinions.
You have, there, read a helluva lot into the short clause you quoted.
I would certainly not endorse triumphalism, but, should a mass of people choose to associate themselves into a state with an explicit, religious, theme, I would have no in-principle objection. I would not be one of them, but tastes differ. (Interestingly, the current State of Israel was, as I understand it, created as a declaredly Jewish entity, though тАЬJewishтАЭ not in the religious sense, but in the alternative, nebulous, one, which, as far as I can make out, encompasses things such as sharing a sense of humour with Allan Stewart Konigsberg.)
At least as strongly as I would support the right to form a religious state, I would support the secession right of a religious (or atheist/agnostic) minority. It is all a matter of the much neglected, fundamental, right of freedom of association.
lol--just peeked in (yup, cain't resist) an' saw ya mentioned the Dhimmi's too! an' yup, it's kinda wacky when the LGBTQ++pi-infinity-furries with farfel crowd are cheerin' on their grim reapers (they like ta throw the boys off buildin's--Clark Kent wouldn't make it in time ta save 'em either!)
Nope, I ain't a hangout (that's kinda funny--nobuddy in their right mind'd find a crackpot performin' ahrtiste like myself ta be a ltd. hangout--not even a "spy")--but laffs aside... IMHO an' backed by a lotta text I've read--the intent of radical Islam (Sharia law) is to kill all the joos--in fact there's a reward's program Hamas offers! (Everyone loves a reward, no?) For every jew killed (via jihad or otherwise) the fambly is set fer life, paid! handsomely! An' the young fella is rewarded in heaven with blessin's an' all the whores in the harem he would ever want--Paradise! It's such a fab program (I only WISH I wuz kiddin') that in fact that's the only $$$ they'll see ever from Hamas -- a corrupt org. that pockets the rest so they can live the high life in Quatar.
Now ya don't have ta believe me one bit (since ya asked, tho, DO look at the links below an' learn from folks that are well-scholared in these matters)--
An' I'll fully AGREE That joos can purdy much live in peace with Christians an' have (with the occasional rift or crusade... ta put it mildly)--done so for a long long time--certainly with success in more modern times. But see here, Jesus never told his followers ta kill all the joos. So if ya like the lahdeedah of everyone livin' together in one nice bus like the Partridge Fambly--I'd say that's California Dreamin'! MANY Muslims ain't radical an' not all even hate joos--as a New Yawker I've certainly encountered that--but even the small percentage that wanna take their scripture literally--come out ta be HUGE numbers.
So here's some homework fer ya--fwiw...
1. The BEST historian on the matter if ya don't wanna go readin' books is this Professor--not even a chew--who 'splains it all:
(gotta scroll down to the early stuff an' work yer way thru it chronologically)
2. Also--if ya wanna hear more 'bout what the great Gad Saad calls "the Noble Race" that's "so" humanitarian an' so happy to live in peace with the chews, then DO take a look at this fella's great work--Robert Spencer--also not a "chew"... but he's studied Islam in depth for decades:
3. Fwiw Gad, mentioned above, is fluent in Arabic an' had ta flee Lebanon at age 11... he covers a lotta ground over many talks an' interviews... I recommend him too as not only a warm, funny human but as a brilliant professor who LIVED the so-called "peaceful sharin' of space" you speak of...
4. An' as far as the ladies go--b/c some've us ladies don't wanna wear hijabs an' be part of the bee-u-tee-ful Caliphate--I'll recommend the many essays on this by Karen Hunt Mezek who shares the experiences an' words of many women who left Islamic nations due to brutal an' harsh treatment...
Search her archive under "Iran"... see what ya find...it's all good stuff...
5. Last but not least, do a little research on the Dhimmi status for "choos"under Islam - it's kinda like a pogrom--they just had ta pay more taxes, couldn't own land, couldn't ride horses (only donkeys)... not fun! This is the so-called "peaceful" times when everyone got along...
('fore I knew better I used ta think 2 state solution was the "best" solution but given a lotta history--an' 5 compromises/treaties refused by the Arabs over time...I do not believe that's remotely possible...)
no worries if yer not interested in readin' the above either--just sharin' in case ya are genuinely curious where I'm gettin' my notions that Hamas is not REMOTELY the "humanistic movement" ya state it is... (fine ta agree ta disagree too!)
You don't have to know you're a limited hangout to be one. Ones who know they are hangouts are called agents. Ones who don't are assets. Assets are usually much more convincing than agents - so they are, in general, preferred.
Thank you for the links, and, more so, for your abstracts.
I doubt you will be surprised, but possibly disappointed, to hear that IтАЩve not followed any of the links.
From your summaries, you appear to have been reviewing studies of an ideology.
My quick thought, which might not survive scrutiny, is that ideology is too nebulous to admit serious study, but, leaving this aside, I am extremely doubtful of the relevance of scholarly analysis of an ideology to relationships amongst actual individuals.
I am not denying that heavy indoctrination can set someone upon a diabolical course of conduct, but this only argues against the specific ideology, and bears upon treatment plans for the affected individual, following his diagnosis. It does not empower, or enable, us to make decisions about unexamined millions of people with whom we have associated the ideology.
I see fixation upon any alien ideology as dangerous. It is too easy to project a, subjectively, abhorrent ideology upon some segment of humanity, to dehumanising effect, and we donтАЩt really need to remind ourselves of to what dehumanisation can lead.
Perhaps you would like to challenge me on that. What is your proposal for a people you deem steeped in a malevolent ideology? Extermination? Indefinite detention in a de-indoctrination camp, as to which the Chinese authorities subject the Uyghurs?
So, that, all, IтАЩm afraid, looks to be digression. Getting back to the topic:
I did not тАЬstateтАЭ that Hamas is a тАЬhumanistic movementтАЭ. That was simply the contention of some evidence I furnished.
It was secondary evidence, which I have not believed to require verification, but its inference is of that being how тАЬHamasтАЭ defines itself, which, really, ought to be determinative of what тАЬHamasтАЭ is (and superior, for example, to what some person, who claims association with Hamas, says of it). Hamas, I think it is fair to say, is a notably shadowy organisation, and, therefore, if anything, more nebulous than, say, the Grand Old Party, or the Democratic Party. Hence, I am dubious of any asserted knowledge of the true essence of it.
Your claims, above [1], were, roughly:
1) That Hamas was not created by the Israeli regime.
2) That Hamas intended a religious genocide of Jewish people.
3) That ISIS was not created by the Israeli regime.
For evidence I asked, but of evidence came there none.
Your abstracts sketched a background that would make your claims less fantastical ( = more easily believed), but this is not evidence (unless you stretch the notion of тАЬcircumstantialтАЭ beyond breaking point).
OK - what is *your* proposal for a people you deem steeped in a malevolent ideology?
What, for example, would you have done about the thugees - a small Indian sect who believed they were under instruction from their God to roam the roads in India and rob and murder other travelers. They brought their children up with this religion and all adhered to it strictly?
As an aside, it is from this sect we derive the word "thug".
Well border security works if the group in question is geographically located somewhere else.
But the thugees lived amongst the people they preyed on. They were not a nation, and didn't live in another, different place separated by a border.
If a religion (cult, gang, whatever) inodctrinates its recruits to attack people who are not in their group, should we (whoever we are) permit that religion? And if we don't permit it (using violence to enforce the ban), then are we in fact just such a dangerous group (gang, cult, religion etc.) ourselves?
I think you are probably correct that borders are the only way to deal with this, but then what do you do when you have people from two groups with incompatible belief systems already intemingled? Must you deport all the members of one of the groups?
It's all a terrible mess - and one reason that multiculturalism is an evil idea. People with incompatible moral codes cannot live together without constant conflict.
тАЬare we in fact just such a dangerous group (gang, cult, religion etc.) ourselves?тАЭ
That is the crux. If you miss-call a rodef, then you become the rodef.
There can be situations in which we have a compulsion to act, arising from our personal idea of morality, to the objective harm of some other. When we do so, we, potentially, expose ourselves to the judgment and retribution of fellow mortals, and, ultimately, of god. The inevitable absence of certainty, in the eventual consequences, if not also of our moral compass and in the factual matrix, ought to induce an extreme reticence.
Being co-located with a sect, who believe themselves тАЬunder instruction from their God to тАж rob and murderтАЭ you, sounds rather far from ideal, to me. However, there may be compensating factors. Those people may have other skills that the community particularly appreciates, or, maybe, the constant threat of being robbed or murdered is regarded as vital relief from a stultifying boredom.
On the assumption the complementary segment of the population isnтАЩt up for being robbed and murdered, disassociation is, as you suggested, the best remedy.
Separation is going to cause some inconvenience, on both sides, but we can hope they will achieve some arrangement that both accept as reasonably fair. (In your example, where one side appears to be losing its entire raison d'├кtre, that may be unlikely.) We always have violence and force, as the backstop; weтАЩre only human, after all.
"To a certain degree, the Islamist organization whose militant wing has rained rockets on Israel the past few weeks has the Jewish state to thank for its existence. Hamas launched in 1988 in Gaza тАж But for more than a decade prior, Israeli authorities actively enabled its rise." [2]
"Most of the time, Israeli policy was to treat the Palestinian Authority as a burden and Hamas as an asset. Far-right MK Bezalel Smotrich, now the finance minister in the hardline government and leader of the Religious Zionism party, said so himself in 2015.
According to various reports, Netanyahu made a similar point at a Likud faction meeting in early 2018, when he was quoted as saying that those who oppose a Palestinian state should support the transfer of funds to Gaza, because maintaining the separation between the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza would prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state." [3]
I doubt itтАЩs unduly speculative to imagine people being nonplussed at being reduced to untermenschen in their own land, nor that this might darken their disposition towards their conquerors and those who maintain the oppression. We ought not, though, presume an especially high instance of blind hatreds of entire, generalised, groups being engendered.
as the now peecee Jane Fonda once said (likely her most articulate quote!): "feel the burn"-- Poor CJ got a little singed an' I'm sure there'll be a lot more coals tossed on the fire... The rest of us need Kevlar gatkehs!
ps I hope this comment doesn't come off wrong--when I said he got singed--I'm sad--he bravely did his satire thing which of COURSE has a lotta truth in it--all good satire DOES-- an' folks got out their bic lighters... he did not deserve it... no writer should git this--I mean "poor" genuinely--I feel bad for 'im--some of us are used ta feelin' this burn all the time... just sayin'... (ps fer those not up on their yankee yiddish--gatkehs are long johns an' kevlar is fireproof fabric!)
Always amazing to me that people prefer to believe in shadowy conspiracy theories about Jews, rather than listen to what Islamic extremists have been publicly saying, publishing, and broadcasting for the last 100 years. You don't have to like Israel or Jews, but if you think Hamas or the ideology they represent are the good guys in ANY equation, you are very sadly mistaken.
I published that Oct 8th. The day after. I knew what it was from the start because I don't watch CNN and don't belive what governments tell me and didn't start paying attention to all this yesterday. Who funds Hamas? Who is on record saying they need to keep funding Hamas? Who formed Hamas to undermine the PLO and two state solution? Who removed soldiers from that portion of the fence the week before and sent them to the west bank? Cui Bono from the false flag? How? All governments derive their power from enemies. If they can't find them, they create them and manufacture them and will not hesitate to sacrifice their own people in the process. This is all well documented Alex. You can choose to ignore it and whine about "conspiracy theories" but don't expect honest people who care about truth to respect you for it.
So you jumped to an immediate conclusion with zero evidence, based on your existing biases, and now you cherry pick whatever you can find to support your predetermined conclusion. But you say you "care about the truth." Got it.
If you care about the truth, look into the actual history of Hamas. Yes, Netanyahu had an ill-advised policy of supporting Hamas in order to keep the Arab factions divided. But by no stretch of the imagination did Israel create Hamas. It was a direct offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, which was founded in the 1920s, when "Palestine" - including the modern state of Jordan - was still a British colony.
Hamas along with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) is and was resistance fighters...fighting an apartheid regime that is brutal, sadistic, and bent on the genocide of the Palestinian people...are they being abused and used, probably...what fighting machine isn't used and abused by the Globalist. The fact that ethnic cleansing is happening should haunt all of us for we are in the middle of a culling.
Exactly! It's a global coup. It says so, in the second chorus, here: https://www.tiktok.com/@rodef_shalom/video/7365378754534706464
The genocidal dancing fools, the mindless fools...the nurses, doctors, police, and the IDF terrorist...haven't a clue to reality.
"So you jumped to an immediate conclusion with zero evidence, based on your existing biases..." Good description of the allegations of rape and mutilation by Hamas. (If those things had actually happened the world would have been subjected to 24/7 replay of it for 9 months now.) Israelis have been presumed to be noble and truthful and eternal victims since 1948; that people are finally questioning that narrative is sticking in many a craw at the moment. It must be especially galling that so many Jewish people are out there protesting the barbaric behavior of the Israelis and their Apartheid system. You can keep on gaslighting but, with all due respect to PT Barnum, it seems that since October 7th there is one less sucker every minute of this genocide.
"So you jumped to an immediate conclusion with zero evidence, based on your existing biases..." Good description of the allegations of rape and mutilation by Hamas.
Good description of the allegation that Osama bin Laden committed 9/11 too, another event which CJ (an author I previously respected) apparently believes happened precisely as we have been told.
Wow. You're actually denying that Hamas terrorists raped and mutilated their victims on October 7? I guess if the extensive first-hand testimony, photographic and video evidence, coroner's reports, and even the conclusion of an investigation by the notoriously anti-Israel United Nations didn't convince you, nothing I could say would possibly make a difference.
Let's have the proof, and none of this "All the victims are dead." Cut the bullshit, show us credible proof, or shut up.
And here you have it: apologists for Israel invoke horrific acts supposedly committed by Hamas but go silent when asked for proof. They expect everyone to be cowed by their wild, unfounded statements (and, presumably, the threat of being called "anti-semitic" for questioning Zionist BS), so they keep throwing out there whatever the hell they want, no matter how debunked. I get it though, what with genocide being so hard to defend. Must be hard to hold a position so minority that literally millions of people around the world take to the streets to denounce it. Why they can't bring themselves to finally come over to the side of truth and decency is beyond me.
Yup, those are definitely the right questions to be asking!
ЁЯСН
Always amazing to me that so many people who comment on Israel and Hamas donтАЩt know that Hamas was created by Israel, and is still run by Israel. Yes, many or perhaps most of the Hamas fighters are Muslims who hate Jews and Israel, but they are just clueless useful idiots who are unknowingly working for Israel while thinking they are attacking Israel. Just ask yourself who benefitted from the 10/7 attack. Certainly not the 130,000 dead Palestinians, many of whom were children.
Technicality: Hamas was not created by Israel, but yes funded by Israel. Back in 1987 BEFORE Hamas was a terrorist org., Israel made the totally butt-headed tactical error of fundin' Hamas thinkin' it would be a clever move to split up the potentially united "Palestinian" front--b/c Hamas was a religious-not-political group (they wanted ta kill the joos but not "for territory"--just on "religious grounds") -- an' again, at the time Hamas had not been terrorist. Thus Israel thought it was a safer "bet"--better than fundin' the PLO (which was political in aim AND territorial)
Boy golly were they wrong---an' I'll add that however fatal an' dumb a decision that was--Israel didn't actually create Hamas (or Isis fer that matter either--folks are sayin' Israel created "them all"...) So yup, it's amazing that some folks think Israel created Hamas an' don't know the backstory (embarrassin' as it is...with fatal results).
You have your shoes on the wrong feet...Israel is a terrorist organization...Hamas is a rag tag band of resistance fighters fighting for their homeland...
Daisy, Daisy, give me your evidence; do!
What you wrote looks like a prime example of a limited hangout.
тАЬArticle 31 Describes Hamas as тАШa humanistic movementтАЩ, which тАШtakes care of human rights and is guided by Islamic tolerance when dealing with the followers of other religionsтАЩ. тАШUnder the wing of IslamтАЩ, it is possible for Islam, Christianity and Judaism тАШto coexist in peace and quiet with each otherтАЩ provided that members of other religions do not dispute the sovereignty of Islam in the region.тАЭ [1]
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Hamas_charter#Summary_of_the_1988_charter
Oh, well, it's alright then. As long as non-Muslims "do not dispute the sovereignty of Islam in the region," accept their dhimmi status and pay the jizaya tax, then peace reigns supreme! Unless, of course, you want human rights of any kind.
The fact that some people hate Jews so much that they are willing to become apologists for Islamic extremism still surprises me. I don't know why though ... When queer, purple-haired college girls in the USA are cheering for Iran, where women are tortured and killed for going outside with their hair uncovered, it's clear that reality has no bearing on people's opinions.
Alex,
You have, there, read a helluva lot into the short clause you quoted.
I would certainly not endorse triumphalism, but, should a mass of people choose to associate themselves into a state with an explicit, religious, theme, I would have no in-principle objection. I would not be one of them, but tastes differ. (Interestingly, the current State of Israel was, as I understand it, created as a declaredly Jewish entity, though тАЬJewishтАЭ not in the religious sense, but in the alternative, nebulous, one, which, as far as I can make out, encompasses things such as sharing a sense of humour with Allan Stewart Konigsberg.)
At least as strongly as I would support the right to form a religious state, I would support the secession right of a religious (or atheist/agnostic) minority. It is all a matter of the much neglected, fundamental, right of freedom of association.
lol--just peeked in (yup, cain't resist) an' saw ya mentioned the Dhimmi's too! an' yup, it's kinda wacky when the LGBTQ++pi-infinity-furries with farfel crowd are cheerin' on their grim reapers (they like ta throw the boys off buildin's--Clark Kent wouldn't make it in time ta save 'em either!)
Nope, I ain't a hangout (that's kinda funny--nobuddy in their right mind'd find a crackpot performin' ahrtiste like myself ta be a ltd. hangout--not even a "spy")--but laffs aside... IMHO an' backed by a lotta text I've read--the intent of radical Islam (Sharia law) is to kill all the joos--in fact there's a reward's program Hamas offers! (Everyone loves a reward, no?) For every jew killed (via jihad or otherwise) the fambly is set fer life, paid! handsomely! An' the young fella is rewarded in heaven with blessin's an' all the whores in the harem he would ever want--Paradise! It's such a fab program (I only WISH I wuz kiddin') that in fact that's the only $$$ they'll see ever from Hamas -- a corrupt org. that pockets the rest so they can live the high life in Quatar.
Now ya don't have ta believe me one bit (since ya asked, tho, DO look at the links below an' learn from folks that are well-scholared in these matters)--
An' I'll fully AGREE That joos can purdy much live in peace with Christians an' have (with the occasional rift or crusade... ta put it mildly)--done so for a long long time--certainly with success in more modern times. But see here, Jesus never told his followers ta kill all the joos. So if ya like the lahdeedah of everyone livin' together in one nice bus like the Partridge Fambly--I'd say that's California Dreamin'! MANY Muslims ain't radical an' not all even hate joos--as a New Yawker I've certainly encountered that--but even the small percentage that wanna take their scripture literally--come out ta be HUGE numbers.
So here's some homework fer ya--fwiw...
1. The BEST historian on the matter if ya don't wanna go readin' books is this Professor--not even a chew--who 'splains it all:
Francisco Gil White:
https://franciscogilwhite.substack.com/archive
(gotta scroll down to the early stuff an' work yer way thru it chronologically)
2. Also--if ya wanna hear more 'bout what the great Gad Saad calls "the Noble Race" that's "so" humanitarian an' so happy to live in peace with the chews, then DO take a look at this fella's great work--Robert Spencer--also not a "chew"... but he's studied Islam in depth for decades:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/
3. Fwiw Gad, mentioned above, is fluent in Arabic an' had ta flee Lebanon at age 11... he covers a lotta ground over many talks an' interviews... I recommend him too as not only a warm, funny human but as a brilliant professor who LIVED the so-called "peaceful sharin' of space" you speak of...
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLH7qUqM0PLieCVaHA7RegA
4. An' as far as the ladies go--b/c some've us ladies don't wanna wear hijabs an' be part of the bee-u-tee-ful Caliphate--I'll recommend the many essays on this by Karen Hunt Mezek who shares the experiences an' words of many women who left Islamic nations due to brutal an' harsh treatment...
Search her archive under "Iran"... see what ya find...it's all good stuff...
https://khmezek.substack.com/archive
5. Last but not least, do a little research on the Dhimmi status for "choos"under Islam - it's kinda like a pogrom--they just had ta pay more taxes, couldn't own land, couldn't ride horses (only donkeys)... not fun! This is the so-called "peaceful" times when everyone got along...
https://katz.sas.upenn.edu/resources/blog/what-do-you-know-dhimmi-jewish-legal-status-under-muslim-rule
('fore I knew better I used ta think 2 state solution was the "best" solution but given a lotta history--an' 5 compromises/treaties refused by the Arabs over time...I do not believe that's remotely possible...)
no worries if yer not interested in readin' the above either--just sharin' in case ya are genuinely curious where I'm gettin' my notions that Hamas is not REMOTELY the "humanistic movement" ya state it is... (fine ta agree ta disagree too!)
You don't have to know you're a limited hangout to be one. Ones who know they are hangouts are called agents. Ones who don't are assets. Assets are usually much more convincing than agents - so they are, in general, preferred.
Daisy,
Thank you for the links, and, more so, for your abstracts.
I doubt you will be surprised, but possibly disappointed, to hear that IтАЩve not followed any of the links.
From your summaries, you appear to have been reviewing studies of an ideology.
My quick thought, which might not survive scrutiny, is that ideology is too nebulous to admit serious study, but, leaving this aside, I am extremely doubtful of the relevance of scholarly analysis of an ideology to relationships amongst actual individuals.
I am not denying that heavy indoctrination can set someone upon a diabolical course of conduct, but this only argues against the specific ideology, and bears upon treatment plans for the affected individual, following his diagnosis. It does not empower, or enable, us to make decisions about unexamined millions of people with whom we have associated the ideology.
I see fixation upon any alien ideology as dangerous. It is too easy to project a, subjectively, abhorrent ideology upon some segment of humanity, to dehumanising effect, and we donтАЩt really need to remind ourselves of to what dehumanisation can lead.
Perhaps you would like to challenge me on that. What is your proposal for a people you deem steeped in a malevolent ideology? Extermination? Indefinite detention in a de-indoctrination camp, as to which the Chinese authorities subject the Uyghurs?
So, that, all, IтАЩm afraid, looks to be digression. Getting back to the topic:
I did not тАЬstateтАЭ that Hamas is a тАЬhumanistic movementтАЭ. That was simply the contention of some evidence I furnished.
It was secondary evidence, which I have not believed to require verification, but its inference is of that being how тАЬHamasтАЭ defines itself, which, really, ought to be determinative of what тАЬHamasтАЭ is (and superior, for example, to what some person, who claims association with Hamas, says of it). Hamas, I think it is fair to say, is a notably shadowy organisation, and, therefore, if anything, more nebulous than, say, the Grand Old Party, or the Democratic Party. Hence, I am dubious of any asserted knowledge of the true essence of it.
Your claims, above [1], were, roughly:
1) That Hamas was not created by the Israeli regime.
2) That Hamas intended a religious genocide of Jewish people.
3) That ISIS was not created by the Israeli regime.
For evidence I asked, but of evidence came there none.
Your abstracts sketched a background that would make your claims less fantastical ( = more easily believed), but this is not evidence (unless you stretch the notion of тАЬcircumstantialтАЭ beyond breaking point).
1. https://cjhopkins.substack.com/p/the-107-truthers/comment/61559319
OK - what is *your* proposal for a people you deem steeped in a malevolent ideology?
What, for example, would you have done about the thugees - a small Indian sect who believed they were under instruction from their God to roam the roads in India and rob and murder other travelers. They brought their children up with this religion and all adhered to it strictly?
As an aside, it is from this sect we derive the word "thug".
Horace,
IтАЩve a vague sense of having heard of thugees/thugs previously. I am more positive of the Konyaks having been mentioned by a friend, the other year.
The answer to your question is border security.
From time to time, other peoples will be hostile.
We should not seek to purge the Earth of everyone we suspect might be, or become, some kind of threat, but association is a mutual thing.
Well border security works if the group in question is geographically located somewhere else.
But the thugees lived amongst the people they preyed on. They were not a nation, and didn't live in another, different place separated by a border.
If a religion (cult, gang, whatever) inodctrinates its recruits to attack people who are not in their group, should we (whoever we are) permit that religion? And if we don't permit it (using violence to enforce the ban), then are we in fact just such a dangerous group (gang, cult, religion etc.) ourselves?
I think you are probably correct that borders are the only way to deal with this, but then what do you do when you have people from two groups with incompatible belief systems already intemingled? Must you deport all the members of one of the groups?
It's all a terrible mess - and one reason that multiculturalism is an evil idea. People with incompatible moral codes cannot live together without constant conflict.
тАЬare we in fact just such a dangerous group (gang, cult, religion etc.) ourselves?тАЭ
That is the crux. If you miss-call a rodef, then you become the rodef.
There can be situations in which we have a compulsion to act, arising from our personal idea of morality, to the objective harm of some other. When we do so, we, potentially, expose ourselves to the judgment and retribution of fellow mortals, and, ultimately, of god. The inevitable absence of certainty, in the eventual consequences, if not also of our moral compass and in the factual matrix, ought to induce an extreme reticence.
Being co-located with a sect, who believe themselves тАЬunder instruction from their God to тАж rob and murderтАЭ you, sounds rather far from ideal, to me. However, there may be compensating factors. Those people may have other skills that the community particularly appreciates, or, maybe, the constant threat of being robbed or murdered is regarded as vital relief from a stultifying boredom.
On the assumption the complementary segment of the population isnтАЩt up for being robbed and murdered, disassociation is, as you suggested, the best remedy.
Separation is going to cause some inconvenience, on both sides, but we can hope they will achieve some arrangement that both accept as reasonably fair. (In your example, where one side appears to be losing its entire raison d'├кtre, that may be unlikely.) We always have violence and force, as the backstop; weтАЩre only human, after all.
I strongly feel people should be much more prepared to stomach the inconvenience of disassociation, but at least as readily to ensure their liberty as for any benefit to their safety. This is something about which IтАЩve been banging on for a good 2.5 years: https://ourdecisiontoo.com//Issue/there-s-nothing-left-to-do-but-go-our-separate-ways/320/
"Hamas тАж is Israel's creation" [1]
"To a certain degree, the Islamist organization whose militant wing has rained rockets on Israel the past few weeks has the Jewish state to thank for its existence. Hamas launched in 1988 in Gaza тАж But for more than a decade prior, Israeli authorities actively enabled its rise." [2]
"Most of the time, Israeli policy was to treat the Palestinian Authority as a burden and Hamas as an asset. Far-right MK Bezalel Smotrich, now the finance minister in the hardline government and leader of the Religious Zionism party, said so himself in 2015.
According to various reports, Netanyahu made a similar point at a Likud faction meeting in early 2018, when he was quoted as saying that those who oppose a Palestinian state should support the transfer of funds to Gaza, because maintaining the separation between the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza would prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state." [3]
1. https://web.archive.org/web/20131026001612/http:/online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB123275572295011847
2. https://web.archive.org/web/20150813061240/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/07/30/how-israel-helped-create-hamas/
3. https://web.archive.org/web/20231008160329/https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
I urge caution in any diagnosis of hatred and its specific targets.
IтАЩm pretty sure this videoтАЩs a theatrical production, but, that aside, it isnтАЩt really illustrative of any particular hatred: https://www.israelhayom.com/2024/05/22/chilling-footage-from-kidnapping-of-idf-female-troops-aired/
I doubt itтАЩs unduly speculative to imagine people being nonplussed at being reduced to untermenschen in their own land, nor that this might darken their disposition towards their conquerors and those who maintain the oppression. We ought not, though, presume an especially high instance of blind hatreds of entire, generalised, groups being engendered.
To hear the independent media tell it, Hamas is winning - or has already won.
Precisely!
https://cjhopkins.substack.com/p/the-107-truthers/comment/61557448
as the now peecee Jane Fonda once said (likely her most articulate quote!): "feel the burn"-- Poor CJ got a little singed an' I'm sure there'll be a lot more coals tossed on the fire... The rest of us need Kevlar gatkehs!
ps I hope this comment doesn't come off wrong--when I said he got singed--I'm sad--he bravely did his satire thing which of COURSE has a lotta truth in it--all good satire DOES-- an' folks got out their bic lighters... he did not deserve it... no writer should git this--I mean "poor" genuinely--I feel bad for 'im--some of us are used ta feelin' this burn all the time... just sayin'... (ps fer those not up on their yankee yiddish--gatkehs are long johns an' kevlar is fireproof fabric!)
Isn't it perfectly possible, perhaps even entirely usual, for both sides in this sort of thing to be in the wrong?