Jews should return to dhimmitude, says Ahmed Benhelli, Secretary-General of the League of Arab States. "Israel as 'the Jewish quarter of an Arab town,'" from the Jewish Refugees blog, with thanks to Lyn:
Revealing outburst by Ahmed Benhelli in the pages of Al-Ahram following the accidental shelling by the Israeli army of Beit Hanoun in Gaza. While he does not explicitly call for the destruction of the Jewish state, Benhelli seems to be calling on Israel to ‘know its place’. There is one word missing in his idealised account of coexistence of Jews and Arabs in the Arab town – ‘dhimmitude’. The Jews never did have equal rights with their Muslim neighbours, were always at their whim and whimsy and owed their achievements to the more benign of their rulers.What Benhelli has in mind is a ‘dhimmi’ state in thrall to its Arab neighbours. Not many Israeli Jews would be too keen. But there is nothing the Jews of Israel would like better, as Benhelli suggests, than to devote their energies to progress and prosperity – if only their neighbours would let them. (Via Guysen Israel News).
Guysen reports: "Ahmed Benhelli, assistant Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, uses the pages of the Egyptian Weekly Al-Ahram in order to pass on a clear message which he believes will settle the conflict once and for all. Israel must return to its historical place as ‘ the Jewish quarter of an Arab town’, and be cut ‘down to size’. His starting point is the Jewish state’s ‘inadequate’ behaviour. Israel is stubbornly clinging to the logic of overwhelming force towards its neighbours, the imposition of its hegemony on others without the slightest moral or human scruple. It lives in total denial of the geography of the region, the nature of its peoples and the composition of its societies. The dominant power in Israel, which is perpetually immune to international measures, is at loggerheads with nature and the logic of history. Israel’s politicians will perhaps draw lessons from the debacle in south Lebanon and previous to that in Gaza, in order to rethink Israel’s strategy in the region and the concept of their approach towards their neighbours, especially the Palestinian people.
Read it all.
Wishful thinking. Is there any nation that wants to take on a Dhimmi status, especially a nation that is as old as Israel and had spent much of its history in a diaspora? Rattle your sabres, see who is left standing when the smoke clears if that is your intention.
Well, at least Ben Helli allows that Jews have some connection to Jerusalem, which is more than can be said for some "scholars" teaching in US academe these days.
/sarcasm -- about the first part. It's the sad truth about the second, that US academe, under the banner of "freedom of speech/thought" accept crackpot theories like the one that denies the location of Solomon's temple, no matter how baseless.
Assalamau Laikum all,
It is well known that at the advent of Islam there were three Jewish tribes who lived in Yathrib (later Medina), as well as other Jewish settlements further to the north, the most important of which were Khaybar and Fadak.
It is also generally accepted that at first Muhd SAW hoped that the Jews of Yathrib, as followers of a divine religion, would show understanding of the new monotheistic religion, Islam.
However, as soon as these tribes realized that Islam was being firmly established and gaining power, they adopted an actively hostile attitude, and the final result of the struggle was the disappearance of these Jewish communities from Arabia proper.
The biographers of the Prophet, followed by later historians, tell us that Banu Qaynuqa and later Banu al-Nadir provoked the Muslims, were besieged, and in turn agreed to surrender and were allowed to depart, taking with them all their transportable possessions.
Later on Khaybar and Fadak were evacuated. The third of the Jewish tribes, Banu Qurayza, sided with the Qurashites and their allies, who made an unsuccessful attack on Medina in an attempt to destroy Islam. This, the most serious challenge to Islam, also failed.
And so we see that despite their history and ancestery, the jews agreed to move along.
It had been like this until the UN in 1940s' decided that actually let's setup things a bit like they were before ....eh...about 1400 years before....now you know posession is 9/10ths of whatever....so this was a mistake.
A mistake that has put 8M Jews in danger, the ME in danger and resulting in possibly the world in danger....what short-sightiness.
Previously, I had already stated that one of the solutions to this problem is for Israel to allow a standing muslim army to guard Israel in return for an agreed Jiza....The muslim army could be come from several of the surrounding Arab states...so as to reduce bias. Just imagine it...muslims soldiers would be putting their very lives on the line for jews....such unprecidented bravery.
Iran has also stated that Israel should be moved to Europe or to the Amerike, and now this chap is asking for the reduction of importance of Israel.
Can you not see that these proposals are being asked for ...for the safety of the Jew...I think you need to consider these proposals seriously.
Naseem,
Your postings are so absurd that I can't figure out whether you are a real person or just a comedian using an alias to parody islam. I suspect the latter.
There is a dunning refrain, by some pseudo-charitable undertaking, that goes something like this: "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance." That is certainly true when applied to American (and Western) policy dealing with Islam, and the Middle East. For just as naive or innocent or corrupt or heedless politicians following fashion allowed in to to go beyond the facade presented by Arab diplomats to see the central role of Islam in shaping the views, the beliefs, the attitudes, of Muslims, especially those who grow up in societies suffused with Islam. Instead unepresentative Muslims -- the smiling "plucky little king" Hussein of Jordan, whose baton has passed to the Deerfield-educated Abdullah, or the assorted Al-Saud diplomats, each with his shtick (the we're-all-slightly-corrupt-men-of-the-world-aren't-we Prince Bandar, the gravelly=voiced grave Turki al-Faisal, or is it Faisal al-Turki? I forget), the outwardly westernized Egyptian or Syrian or Iraqi representatives of assorted cruel and certainly hostile regimes, the phony "Palestinians" angling as always for more Jizyah, more Jizyah, more Jizyah from the Western world, and even the so-called "democrats" in the Muslim lands, trying to manipulate and inveigle the Baby-Huey Americans to come right in, supply money, weapons, or even intervene directly, in order to supposedly change things but without touchiing, or even being aware of, the role of Islam which can only be contained or brought into question by Muslims themselves who are forced by circumstances to connect the political, economic, social, moral, and intellectual failures of their societies with Islam itself.
But this cannot occur as long as the Western world's leaders keep ignoring the centrality of Islam, and as long as those leaders, and the Wesetern media, do not subject Islam to constant critical scrutiny, showing how, for example, Islam encourages the habit of submission to the ruler, as long as that ruler can be viewed as a Muslim (which is why those engaged at the corrutption and misrule of this or that regime, say that of Mubarak, or of the Al-Saud family helping themselves to so much of the nation's wealth, are described most effectively by those opposed to them not as "corrupt" or "bad" but as in bed with the Infidels). Furthermore, despotism is encouraged because the contract theory of governemnt (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau) which locates legitimacy in the expressed will of the people, is alien to Islam, in which the only thing that matters is the will expresed by a whimsical and unyielding Allah in the Qur'an, and the Qur'an itself glossed by the Hadith (which themselves are merely tales woven, by and large, by elaborating upon those very Qur'anic passages which,in turn, the Hadith are said to illuminate).
The social failures of Islam can be seen in the mistreatment of all women and of all non-Muslims; a belief-system that uncompromisingly divides the world between Believers and Infidels, and insists that the duty of Believers is to ensure that Islam everywhere dominates and everywhere Believers (i.e., Muslims) rule, is not a system that accomodates, or can be accomodated by, modern notions of pluralism. It is a permenant threat, rather, to all non-Muslims.
]
The moral failures of Islam come from that habit or duty of unquestioning submission to the will of Allah, and to the system of Total Regulation that Islam commands, and the Complete Explanation of the Universe that Islam offers. There is no encouragement of the exercsise of moral choice or free will. One follows the strictures of Allah. If those strictures turn out to be disturbing (as, for example, in the case of the supposedly "moderate" Hamid Mir, whnose response to information brought to him about the Qur'an, which he claimed not to have been familiar with, was to complain that now he, Hamid Mir, would have to follow blindly these new and unpleasant strictures --as if his former supposed ignorance would have left things better off. It is a peculair mindset indeed, when a Believer wishes not to know everything about his religion but instead to stay blissfuly ignorant, lest in learning more, he would have to be more even more aggressive and dangerous in regard to Infidels than he might otherwise be.
apparently worries that some of those brought to his attention will be The economic backwardness of Muslim states, dependent entirely either on the accident of geology or, when they do not have oil and gas, on the disguised Jizyah of foreign aid from Infidels, must be linked to the inshallah-fatalism that Islam encourages at every step. must first recognize those failures, and then relate them both to the actual content of Islam, the tenets derived from Qur'an and Hadith, and then from what may be called the attitudes of Islam, including that habit of mental submission that is not admirable but rather deplorable, and the habit of seeing people always as part of a collective, never as individuals. not least by hearing this incessantly from Infidels no longer willing to play the "let's-pretend-Islam-is-fine-and-in-any-case-it's-whatever-Muslims-want-to-say-i-is" from the Western world)-- the facade with which the Bakers, Scowcrofts, Rosses and Indyks work, and which that long-time fervent anti-Israel and pro-"Palestinian" president (as he consistently demonstrated, for all who had eyes to see -- few did -- during the farcical "negotiations" at Camp David, where Begin was beaten down on every occasion, not so much by Sadat, as by Carter and Brzezinski, ably assisted elsewhere in the government by people such as Gary Sick (the man who did so much to lose Iran) and Lt. Gen. (now ret'd.) William Odom, the man who thinks the only way to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is to force Israel to give up its own armory, i.e. to force Israel to commit, as Odom (ret'd.) sweetly does not quite put it, suicide.
If Islam were thorooughly grasped and what is actually said, day after day, in the Arab and Muslim world, taken seriously, this would have saved hundreds of billions of dollars spent and usually squandered in Iraq. It would have allowed a succession of terminally naive and uncomprehending American political figures to interpret correctly, and to dismiss, the soothing comments of those unrepresentative masters of taqiyya (and bearing gifts -- false gifts of "moderation" on oil, real gifts -- to the benefit of a handful of the well-connected in Washington -- of contracts for this or that business, or this or that "international business consultant" of the Raymond-Close variety (and how astonishing to see the name of Raymond Close pop up in connection with Baker's Iraq Study Group -- or rather, how unastonishing that sinister appearance turns out to be, and one wonders why James Akins was not also consulted by the "Iraq Study Group" as a conduit for presenting what the Al-Saud want, and want now) appearance is).
And it would have allowed them to see the Arab war on Israel not as it has been so cleverly and deliberately presented, as one of "two tiny peoples," a war which supposedly began -- in 1967 or 1948, depending on whether a Western or Muslim audience is being addressed -- with the "occupation" by Israel of land-- but as a Lesser Jihad, directed at ending forever any conceivable Infidel sovereign state in land once possessed by Muslims. It would have allowed them to understand just how Muslim triumphalism works, and how each new concession does not win other concessions, or changes of finds, but merely feeds the Muslim triumphalism that, thanks to oil money and migration to the West, has allowed the Jihad to metastasize beyond the Lesser Jihads waged against the Jews of Israel or the Hindus of Kashmir and India, or the Christians of sub-Saharan Africa (in the Sudan and Nigeria), to Western Europe itself.
It is probably too much to have the Western governments renew their understanding, that some of them once had, of the considerable, even overwhelming, claims by Israel to the land currently under its control, claims wich are legal(by all the rules of war and post-war settlement that have everywhere else obtained), historic (by the provisions of the League of Nations' Mandate for Palestine, provisions which the successor organization to the League, the United Nations, was required by its own charter to accept), and moral (for this, see the entire history of the last 1400 years in both Western Christendom, and in Dar al-Islam, and the treatment of the Jews in both places).
But it is not too much to demand that only those with a thorough grasp of the tenets, attitudes, and atmospherics of Islam, those who have set to school to learn from the texts (and not only or even mainly the Qur'an but also the Hadith and of course the most important details in the life of Muhammad, the Perfect Man, worthy of emulation in every respect) should be allowed to possess an opinion worth even listening to, much less permitted to presume to fashion high policy, the consequences of which the rest of us must endure.
It is madness that people such as Jimmy Carter once presumed to decide our Middle Eastern policy, and he apparently presumes still. It is madness that people who never understood Islam but who prated (and prate) about "our friends in the Gulf" -- such people as James Baker -- are looked to as "wise men." It is madness that the State Department flunkey, now Baker's flunkey as the president of the "James Baker Institute" for somethingorother, Edward Djerijian, who still cannot quite grasp what the Alawites are all about, or why it matters, should be writing up the Iraq Study Report. It is madness that the "experts" consulted include the usual taqiyya-and-tu-quoque crew (Shibley Telhami, et al.) but not Fouad Ajami or even Bernard Lewis, and not a single defector from the Muslim world, not a single apostate, such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali or Ibn Warraq, has appared before this committee which, though called the Iraq Study Group, is really about, or should be about, how to pluck a "victory" from the confused muddle of Iraq, by ensuring that whatever happens, the Camp of Islam is divided and demoralized and the Camp of Infidels thereby strengthened.
Given the personnel involved, this won't happen. It can't possibly happen. Whether or not the result of the Iraq Study Group is to provide a plausible cover for the obstinate Bush to remove American troops, and permit the "victory" achieved by early 2004 to slowly be recognized -- a "victory" consisting in an outcome that is the very opposite of that which Bush insisted would define his "victory" -- is unclear. If it does, then objectively it will have furthered the Infidel position and weakened that of the Camp of Islam.
It will be interesting to see if James Baker does the bidding of his favorites -- "our friends in the Gulf" -- and attempts to prolong the American involvement in Iraq so as to ensure a good outcome for the Sunnis, to get the Americans acting as their advocate vis-a-vis Iran and its current puppet Syria (instead of reading the Alawites the riot act, and openly getting the Saudis to talk of "the Alawite Infidels in Damascus" -- which is a threat that should be made on every occasion).
Or if, somehow, magically, he manages to slough off his entire past, and do the right, and well-informed and patriotic thing.
"Naseem" says:
"Can you not see that these proposals are being asked for ...for the safety of the Jew...I think you need to consider these proposals seriously."
God says:
"Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling
unto all the people round about.... Jerusalem twill
be] a burdensome stone for all people....in that day
will I make the governors of Judah...like a torch
off re in a sheaf; and they shall devour an the
people round about..." Zechariah 12:2,3,6
Islam is about to become Waslam - Hamongog awaits
it.
Howard said:
"Naseem,
Your postings are so absurd that I can't figure out whether you are a real person or just a comedian using an alias to parody islam. I suspect the latter."
I suspect Naseem is a creation of the Borat team.
She certainly knows how to take the (p)Is(s) out of Islam.
If Israel captured the whole region as the imperialist monster that it reputedly is then all the Muslims would live better lives with greater freedom and prosperity. Of course that will never happen. If Israel disappeared one could expect another Holocaust given the sheer insanity of the palestinians, followed by a return to a vast wasteland (as the land Israel now sits upon was prior to 1948). No dhimmi status needed at all, just complete destruction.
How long before Dhimhud Olmert accepts Benhelli's proposal as a "constructive suggestion on the road to peace"???
Xaragma,
No, Nasseem has obviously never had heard the phrase "foxes guarding the henhouse" which is exactly what she is proposing. She has either never been around a farm, or believes westerners are so gullible as to believe good will from the muslim world dispite the repeated violence perpretrated by muslims following appeasment. The very thought that any muslim would care about the welfare of a single Israeli has me falling off my chair with laughter. Naseem, I think we'll need about 500 years of non-stop muslim goodwill before your proposal will ever even be considered. It will take that long before the muslim world could be trusted.
How long before Dhimhud Olmert accepts Benhelli's proposal as a "constructive suggestion on the road to peace"???
Posted by: Provoslavni
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6187282.stm
Beats their usual calls for Genocide at least
However may I add that slavery is wrong and that I would gladly fight by and for protecting both the Jews and their State from Islamic and Nazi and leftist enemies.
The dominant power in Israel, which is perpetually immune to international measures, is at loggerheads with nature and the logic of history. Israel’s politicians will perhaps draw lessons from the debacle in south Lebanon and previous to that in Gaza, in order to rethink Israel’s strategy in the region and the concept of their approach towards their neighbours, especially the Palestinian people.the above is a laugh there never has been the Palestinian people except in their mind the so-called Palestinian people are in fact refugees in the state of Israel that ran was formed because of leaders only would be killed by the Jews are surrounding Arab states as a political tool to pressure on the US and a schizophrenic idea in Muslims brains that they have the right overrun and occupy lands in the name of the fantasy called allha, and the people there already there have no right to fight back
Worry not Bush Cheney et all will sell out Israel in a heartbeat..their loyalty is to oil and the Saudis.
Correction make that have sold out Israel.
Don't forget Cheney was Chairman of the (Islamic) Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce, and has always been a good friend of the Saudis, Bush is also a good friend of the Saudis who have proven to be his and his families loyal patrons..(also business partners).
Israel is, from the perspective of the neo cons, a throw away.. and don't forget that most of the "neo cons" were (and still are) Trotskyites, which for your information is about as "leftist", commie as you can get.
Cheers.
Naseem and now I have quit laughing having Muslims paying protection money to Arab army get real . The Koran calls Jews and Christians apes and pigs and severely anti-Semitic and you want people to believe this guarding the Jewish state I have to wonder whether one. You have an IQ of less than 5
two whether high on hashishor three just plain stupid or four all of the above. The state of Israel paying protection money would be like the Danes and Danegeld that England paid to stop viking raids in the middle ages it just didn't work and for Israel to pay protection money to Muslims would be a death sentence. The best thing the West could do is actively promote I can hydrogen powered economy instead of oil countries like France with all the nuclear reactors could become a center for a new energy supply based on cracking hydrogen and oxygen from sea water and and it cars be modified to burn hydrogen like they are to burn propane probably the only losers would be the oil companies and countries like Saudi Arabia that are dependent on oil exports and seeing how the counties are making billions in profits let them put those profits into the infrastructure needed for hydrogen filling stations after all they would be the ones making money off the sale of the gas.
Naseem. I don't want arab armies to protect me.
I trust the IDF much more. Shalom. :)