Thread: Save al Aqsa

Originally Posted by sudais1

we dont want to fight, just simply give us our land back.

The problem is that there are several million people living there who believe it to be 'their' land, and who have already on several occasions demonstrated just as much willingness to fight for it as any previous occupier. Nobody is going to 'give it back'; there is no way of identifying previous 'owners' anyway. Why 'us'? Are you Palestinian? Israel is no more 'muslim' land than Jewish or Christian land.. a religion doesn't occupy land, people do. For most of the history of the Arab/Israeli conflict (note that's 'Arab', not 'muslim') it wasn't even the major issue - the PLO was essentially a secular, socialist organisation, as were most of the Arab governments that got involved in the war that lost East Jerusalem to the Israelis in the first place.

we were so nice to the Jews like when The muslims conqured spain the jews lived therin because we treated them well.

Jerusalem is obviously holiest of cities but we conquered it last and it was added to another part of a country unfairly.

There seems to have been an awful lot of 'conquering' going on. With that in mind, where does 'unfairness' come in when somebody else does it? The Israelis 'conquered' Jerusalem last, surely..? Or doesn't that count?

Meaning Palestianas let alone Muslims want their land.

As far as most muslims are concerned, the conflict has little to do with them... no more than the general humanitarian concerns the rest of us share. Historically, those in the region treated the Palestinians (particularly refugees) worse than the Israelis did.

Failing to 'recognise' Israel is utterly pointless. The State of Israel is there, it is a fact, and its people aren't going anywhere. Neither are they turning their land over to anybody. The real way to peace, and to make life better for the Palestinians is to do everything we can to establish a genuine, independent, successful Palestine in Gaza and the West Bank. That's what most Palestinians want, too.. not another attempt to destroy Israel which will cause them even more misery than previous efforts. They understand that wishful thinking gets them nowhere.. most don't even remember the land that is supposed to be 'theirs'. The Arabs had two real chances to destroy Israel, in 1948 and 1967. They failed. Now, to obtain peace, it is necessary to deal with the world as-is, not with a fantasy.

By the way, this stuff about the Israelis planning to destroy the al Aqsa mosque and rebuild the Temple crops up every few years or so; there was no truth in it before and is none now. A (very) few Zionist extremists/nutters once floated the idea but it has never had any mainstream support in Israel at all (not least because they are perfectly well aware of the consequences). It's just a scare story.

Jerusalem is not Holy by Isreal if it is they wouldnt Hold Gay parades.

Oh so if Jerusalem was under Arab control then gays would not only be denied there basic human rights, but would be denied any type of freedom of speech. That is good to know then, that Jerusalem will not be under Arab control.

And by the way tons of Orthodox Jews protested it with riots so they had to move it to a stadium, but they were never denied freedom of speech.

It simply needs to be freed of the Zionist, returned to it's Owners

I hope you are not suggesting Muslims! You do realize there was church and Temple before Mosques there.

Muslims are relative newcomers to the Holy Land.

Prime Minister Olmert's Grandfather is not Isreali he's palestianin. Does that give u a clue who's land it was

"Palestinian" was what everyone was named when it was a mandate. To give you a history lesson there has never been a country called "Palestine" and there has never been a history or movement for the people. The movement called the "PLO" never even wanted a state until an Arab instigated war lost Arab land and the Arab world needed a reason to keep Arab interest in getting the land they lost because the Jews outnumbered destroyed them in battle.

The true Jews won't even go to Isreal as they were Exiled off the Land by God.

Since your the self proclaimed expert on this, where in the Talmud does it discuss the exile?

Can you tell me what the exile conditions were?

Are you knowledgable about the oaths?

If not, then I suggest you do not talk because there are a lot of smart Jewish people here that will call your BS.

Peace.

I tend to regard the idea that al-Aqsa is being undermined and destroyed intentionally as a conspiracy theory, because there are very similar things going around that the Palestinians are trying to undermine and collapse the Western Wall. If there are two things that are very similar like this, then the chances are that at least one story is fake.

But I do agree that there are groups trying to destroy al-Aqsa. One of them wants the Masjid torn down and moved to Makkah (Mecca), which is pointless since it commemorates the place where the Prophet (pbuh) ascended into paradise. I think we should not be like children and argue about who got their first, because this goes back thousands of years. Instead we should remember that the Temple Mount is very sacred to Jews, Christians and Muslims, and therefore all of these groups should be entitled to ownership of their respective parts of the Rock. Jews should get the Wall and the Mount itself, along with other Hebrew-era relics near the formation, Muslims should control al-Aqsa, the Dome of the Rock and all the Masjids nearby, and Christians should have the Churches in the area. I also think the whole Jerusalem area should be controlled by a kind of tri-faith council, so that there is as little conflict as possible.

As for the rest of Israel, I think that is certainly necessary for Jews to have a state somewhere, otherwise they would have nowhere that is safe from persecution. But at the same time, the Arabs who now live in Palestine should have their own country. So, prehaps a Palestinian state should be formed from the Gaza Strip and the west bank. The state should also incorperate the Negev region, to provide the Arabs with more land, and so that no enclaves and exclaves are formed.
One problem with simply having a Palestinian state composed of the current areas of Gaza and the West Bank is because these areas are not physically connected to each other, which would mean that Israel would be able to control movement in between these areas, which would mean more babies dying at checkpoints. But if these areas were connected together by a thin strip of land, two problems would occur:
1. Israel would be separated into two areas, and Israeli babies would now be dying at Palestinian checkpoints
2. Israel could bomb the strip in order to prevent access along it, which would mean more hardship for Palestinian civilians

So, instead, the whole Negev should be incorperated into Palestine, which would mean a good future for both Israel and palestine.

I also think the whole Jerusalem area should be controlled by a kind of tri-faith council, so that there is as little conflict as possible.

That was what is was suppose to be in 1948, but Arab armies conquered it and destroyed the Jewish Quarter and prevented freedom of worship.

Originally Posted by lavikor201

That was what is was suppose to be in 1948, but Arab armies conquered it and destroyed the Jewish Quarter and prevented freedom of worship.

How is that going to help? Wouldn't it be much more productive if we thought about solutions to the conflict, rather than goint through all this ''your fault! Your fault!'' business? Loads of people are to blame for the Israeli Palestinian issue. The zionists, the Palestinian militias, the other Arab countries, the USA, colonial Britain, the USSR, Hezbollah, the list goes on!

And if I wanted to counter your argument, I could say that in 1915 the British declared that they would establish an Arab-ruled state in their Palestinian Mandate, but then went back on their words with the Balfour Declaration. But as I said before, it's childish to play the blame game.

Listen: On Israel and Palestine. Media Matters. December 3, 2006.

Note: Need RealPlayer to listen or any application that play's ".rm" files.

Here's a map of my two-state solution:


I decided to let Saudi Arabia have the Negev, since it is a large area, and Israelis may think that they are loosing out in land if it is all Palestinian. The green bit is the tri-faith council's area.

How is that going to help? Wouldn't it be much more productive if we thought about solutions to the conflict, rather than goint through all this ''your fault! Your fault!'' business?

I am just saying that history repeats itself, and right now, currently freedom of worship is granted to all under Israeli sovereignty.

decided to let Saudi Arabia have the Negev

Saudi Arabia does not need more desert.

Plus, why should Israel give any land when they know many Muslims will continue to not want peace and fight Israel as long as they exist. Why give up land, that will put you at risk defensivly when you know peace will not occur.

As long as Israel exists there are members of this forum that will never accept her! Let alone the who Islamic world!!!