malik wrote:

Israel lover questions Iran lover

Not really, I didn't speak to you, I scorned you.

malik wrote:

islam is about helping the oppressed, so why not. most of the world hates israel.
its clear you side with cruelty committed by israel in Gaza and west bank. you are blinded by your hatred for muslims.

If I thought you were typical I definitely would think all Muslims were totally screwed, I would sign whatever anti-Muslim document you put in front of me, however racist. Really you know my position isn't a question of that - I'm sure some operations that Israel has been condemned for are operations that were justified, and I'm sure that some were not, which means that Palestinians sometimes are treated very cruelly, as you say. To speak out against that is by no means to join your camp, any more than I would take issue with Obama (given a reason) by aligning myself with Tea Party activists.

I am for encouraging anyone, Jewish or Muslim, to consider how to bring an end to conflict that is workable. That means BOTH SIDES WOULD HAVE TO MAKE COMPROMISES. To date you are not a compromising sort, which this thread is meant to demonstrate because I found Funzo's stance (which he later clarified to distance himself a little) intensely irritating. I don't mind Funzo though, we have had nice chats and AFAIK he isn't militant like you. I don't hate Muslims, this thread is about you and those who agree with you, and that is some Muslims, and it is about frustration and disgust, not hate. And we do disagree about many historical facts - I am open to revision, and am often wrong about things, but in my experience nobody is always right. Is it possible your own education in the matter tells only half a story? Is there any chance, Malik, that you ever look at things that way, rather than as an angry loyalist? Maybe you already answered that:

malik wrote:

terrorist israelis kill innocent women and children in Palestine. But now these bad jews are going to be wiped off the map by iran.

But maybe you didn't.

malik wrote:

jews have nuclear bombs in israel are in no position to complain about iran's nuclear bombs. israel is an intolerant racist society which UN human rights body condemned many times. soon their days will be over. God will destory Israel for its oppression of muslims.

But you do not hear Jews talking of wiping anyone off the map. Some people, going even further than yourself to defame Jews (but with greater subtlety) might offer nice reinterpretations of your leaders' words, so that Israel always seems to be a Woody Allen neurotic in a Terminator body, but it isn't like that. I'm glad you don't. It is strange that you find Israel intolerant by comparison with just about anyone you DO support.

malik wrote:

its not slander. jews did steal palestinian land and forced out muslims from their homes. so, its only right that israelis now pay for their evil crimes from 1948 to 2010.

OK, find out what Jews think happened at, say, Jewish Virtual Library. You might not accept their version of events, but know this: Jews do. We are not purposely making anything up, and we can talk. Rhetoric against Israel tends to be exceptionally vicious. It isn't useful if we want an accord, although naturally Malik if you are hellbent on victory and delight in insincerity and baiting, such details are incidental.

malik wrote:

it is isiraeli lobbies like AIPAC which control White House and Financial centers of the west. we all know this.US and UK are being used by zionist who stole Palestine in 1948. israel is sinking its own allies.

This is why I point out you refer to the neo-nazi playbook, the Jewish banking conspiracies. Are you that simple? Do you not see that in every society there are successful people and unsuccessful people, and many non-Jews are successful, and many Jews unsuccessful, as much as the other way? Arab wealth or Arab lobbyists register to you? Is that particular wealth non-corrupt whereas Jewish wealth is? Really Malik??? OK. Incidentally if you want to understand why Israel has kept the US so close, consider how outnumbered Israel is by Arab states and how easy it is to pass resolutions against Israel if the US continually withheld its veto. That isn't some point in Israel's defense, just a point of fact.

Quote:

Are people making arguments you don't agree with just trying to undermine and conquer you?

malik wrote:

it is murderers such as zionists who have blood of innnocent people on their hands, it is they who undermine decency and humanity. God curse them.

But Malik, you didn't understand, honestly do you believe that I could only be sat here writing this as a bought hand or out of support for inhumanity?

Quote:

Is it acceptable to oppose them with beliefs borrowed from the script of neo-nazis and decried by legitimate historians the world over?

malik wrote:

iran says what israel calls legitimate historians are paid by zionists. Holocaust did happen but President Ahmadinejad said 6 million Jews did did not die. its a hoax invented by historians funded by israeli lobbies.
The first Nazis were German; todays Nazis are Israeli army. The truth is that IDF is worse than SS.

You understand little of your comparison except that it inflames the minds of Jews and, if believed, advances your case. If you knew how sick it is to present that - viciously anyway, and not like an appeal for mercy - and how destructive it is not to your cause but to that of Palestinian autonomy, you wouldn't go there.

And are scientists in the fields of geology, biology and physics doing their utmost to destroy God?

malik wrote:

Scientists cannot kill God. their findings only go on to confirm how powerful He is.

Hey... I AGREE! But you have made comments before suggesting that you hold new theories in extremely low regard and that scientists are doing the devil's work. Here you have only referred to "their findings" which is a bit weasely of you.

malik wrote:

Lanat on all Jews who side with illegal and immoral state of Israel. May God curse all lovers of Israel and their supporters. Ameen.

You insult God if you think He will listen to such a vile curse. I won't further the insult by asking him not to.

I don't know why an Iran-lover has to hate an Israel-lover, to use your terminology, or vice versa. In fact the Jewish Persians I know are very sad about it all.

I appreciate the time you took, with the formatting and all. This reply obviously is for you.

This is an explanation as to why I have discarded the possibility of replies I considered a moment ago: giving a view on the article you linked; emphasising the successes of liberal and peaceful movements in Israel; linking articles that reflect poorly on Gaza and the West Bank and well on Israel; discussing root causes; or even after eschewing that: objecting to a technique of discussion I try to avoid, being to cherry pick instances that prove one party more right than the other. Occasionally a particular instance is just that clarifying but this isn't, and fully to justify that remark I really would need to get into that business of arguing from loyalty alone until you experience the same futility in it as I have found. You are entirely justified, in fact it is a good thing as I see it, to argue for better treatment of Palestinians. Peace Now does that, B'tselem does that, I'm sure you can find plenty of untainted organisations. But it would possibly be silly to stand in the line of fire with Malik, or Hamas, or Hizbollah, or Iran, none of which are renowned for giving a damn about human rights as you do. Not just silly, strange.

I get regular updates from Peace Now. I'm not involved with them directly but in conversation I have developed a respect. Because of people like Malik they are commonly confronted with the question: why are you telling Jews what to do when concessions make no difference to the enmity Israel faces? There are good answers to that (and terrible ones), but as long as that enmity comes with a clenched fist held high for a plethora of demands that are not just, those arguments are slightly theoretical, whereas Peace Now keeps going in spite of those concerns because there is nothing theoretical about the bloodshed and what is unjust. The ideologies of Malik and many like him are a major part of the problem, and they are no more human rights policies than the BNP is the party of respect for community or whatever other claptrap they want to put on their banners. I think it's terrible that Britain has fewer and fewer intrinsically British communities, which is to say people can't do what they like in the pubs, aristocrats cannot pursue old hunting traditions that it turns out had a good agricultural basis, the media and global commerce has taken people away from their halls and churches to form communities not unlike this right here, which is not an adequate replacement for community life. But you wouldn't find me saying that where a BNP activist is campaigning for votes, the argument is too easily coopted into very different, racist, beliefs. Same. I think.

Malik's an example of someone it's little use talking to except for demonstration and study. He takes his lead from authority; that makes a solution without bloodshed a very long shot but we can try. Meanwhile I'm sure everyone follows developments and can see what's coming.