Spikey, CJ
I see polycarp in a new light (perhaps).
If he actually did do as he says (ie how did he know that it was taking place? perhaps on "Todays_protest_marches for_the_pahelogically_minded.com.au\melbourne")
One must admire his dedication if not his reasoning skills or pragatism (what did he hope to achieve?).
Do you think he was hoping to get beat up so he could go on TV and claim proof that Muslims are violent? Nah that's too convoluted and contrived even for him.
Perhaps he was hoping to be a TV vox pop because he was the token religious bigot at the march.....sounds more plausible.
One can now wonder how many farmers wind mills are safe from him?
Sorry PC I just couldn't resist.

Polycarp wrote:

1948 JEWS accept a partition plan. Arabs (stirred up by Grand Mufti Husseini, in the pay of Hitler(until Hitler died)) reacted with violence and war. Arabs were defeated. (stiff bickies..they picked the fight) Thus, the (Palestinian) Arabs showed early on that they were not interested in any kind of 2 state solution and wanted Israel not to exist. Hence...they forfeited their right by any measure of reason to territory in Palestine. What was given to them thereafter was pure 'grace'...(underserved)
Then...shock horror... after being defeated, they whined about "Israel not complying with the UN partition" (which they had rejected)

Dear Polycarp,

The above is incomplete. There were actually two wars in 1948. One was between Jews and Palestinian Arabs. That was not much of a contest. The other was between Jews and five Arab armies trying to wipe out the new state. The Egyptian armies were trained and officered by the English. The 50,000 strong Jordanian Arab Legion was commended by Glubb, an Englishman and supported by England.

Between 1948 and 1967 Jordan occupied the West Bank, and Egypt occupied Gaza. The Palestinians may have wanted a state, but the Arab occupiers did not allow the Palestinians any say.

One really should not lump all Palestinian Arabs together. Palestinian Arab Christians are discriminated against by Hamas which is an Islamic organization. The proportion of the Arab population that is Christian has been declining as they see no good future. Hamas is not interested in two states as they want to eliminate Israel. However, some Muslim Palestinians who are not Hamas might be quite interested in a Palestinian state.

Two conflicting parties are fighting over the same territory. The reasonable solution would be for all to share it in peace with one state neither Muslim nor Jewish and paying no attention to the ethnicity or religion of its citizens. That won’t happen. Another solution would be for all religions to vanish. Unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be a cure for those delusional systems.

We need nuclear-free, religion-free and ideology-free zones.

Polycarp,

You got it wrong by asserting that the crisis has a singular cause...the one that suits your monotonous and singular anti-Islam prejudice.

If it were that simple, the issue would have been sorted decades ago.

You might actually find it a wholesome and refreshing change to analyse the Middle East situation from multiple perspectives. It's about balance and assessing ALL the evidence.

I know that's beyond your capacities and predilections, but that's what a proper debate would entail.

'Islamism evokes the ghost of puritanical Christianity and its constant attacks on the permissive society; the Crusaders; European sectarian wars; the Inquisition; moral crusades. Thus the opposition to Islam and Muslim minorities in Europe and in other Western countries is in fact resistance to the return of puritanical Christianity and the Church - metaphorically the Grand Inquisitor- which the Europeans struggled against for a long time and made tremendous sacrifices to overthrow, in the form of political Islam.'

Well done Nursel Guzeldeniz for the above excellent paragraph. However, I do not see it as being irrational to equate Islam with the 'puritanical Christianity' of the Middle Ages. One only has to look at contempory Muslim societies to see that they suffer the same horrible problems that Europe used to when the Popes and Kings ruled the serfs.

Islam (and 'puritanical Christianity') in Europe and other Western societies only behaves itself because it has to. The commercial media and greater public opinion ensures that the totalitarian ideology of monotheism is kept on a leash. However, whenever Islam gains any significant political power then its 'sweet smiles' vanish. For both Islam and 'puritanical Christianity' are monoliths who exist for only one purpose. To oppose, depose, and then persecute, all other cultural diversities.

david f's delusions re the holocaust being somehow Christian is more an indication of wishful thinking on his part. Better not let the truth get in the way of a bigoted theory.

The statement from Nursel that: "The use of essentialist statements about Islam and Muslims block dialogue and debate" is irrational.

Going to the essence of things is where you find a standard measure or objectivity by which to form a judgment.

Muslims who are serious about their religion will tell you that Islam has definite teachings. It is not 'up to the individual'. That is a post modernist statement of no relevance for most of the world's largest religions.

There are some good objective measures by which to definitely make a clear judgment about Islam:
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/islam/index.htm