The Troubled History of Jews

Thank you for re-writing history...at least in some cases.

What amazes me the most are your one-eyed subjective statements in the final paragraph about Arafat. Living in the west...I can tell you that you are just regurgitating recent White House propaganda line on Palestine....

All in all, a failed attempt to discredit Arafat.

Dear Sridar ji

I suggest that you go through an oldish article on chowk and the discussion that follows.

Suicide Bombers
by Waqar Talib

http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00002484&channel=civic%20center&start=0&end=9&chapter=1&page=1

++
As the Americans are fond of saying, two wrongs do not make a right.
++

Sure but patting one party on the back and slapping the other in the face isn`t going to solve any problems either.

Regards.

Two quick points Khan Sahib,
Mandela did take up arms against the aparhteid regime of South Africa. He is very candid in his autobiography, Long walk to freedom. He was charged and convicted of sabotage. Even after this he remains my hero. Another factual mistake is that about the offer Ehud Barak gave to Arafat at Camp David. Contrary to the popular assertion by media, Arafat was not offered 96 percent of West Bank. What was offered was incontinous and unworkable state in the form of five cantons. Five in West Bank and one in Gaza. One of the cantons would have been near East Jersusalem but the Al-Aqsa complex would have remained under Israeli control. Even Robert Malley, a member of the American team at Camp David, said that no Palestinian leader could have justified something like this to his people. With all his shortcomings I must say had it not been for him the idea of a Palestinian state would have been in the dustbin of the human history.

re: #93 by Dr_Riq
Let us first discuss what is legitimate and what is not, instead of accusing each other of stupidity!
Is killing of innocent people by ``suicide bombers`` a legitimate way of addressing one`s grievances? You yourself have said ``No`` to that question in your last post.
Is Israel then justified in defending itself from the onslaught of ``suicide bombers``? You bet, it is.
All i am saying then is that the Palestenians need to find another way of fighting for their cause. Trying to force someone to your views thr` terrorism just does not work.

``On that argument, you then have NO reason to critisise suicide bombers; they are being unjustified in killing civillians, sure, but so is the Israeli army in killing civillians too. So everything cancels out and its allright in the end?``
The above statement of yours still does not make any sense to me. As the Americans are fond of saying, two wrongs do not make a right.

``need I not remind you that although Israel has a population roughly that of the city of London, it has the 4th largets military in the world? That military spending in Israel is so great? That the aid benefitted to Israel form the US is greater that US aid spent on the whole of the African continent?``
You perhaps need some lessons in history.
The 1966 war (also called the Six day war) was precipitated by Egypt when it closed the Suez Canal and expelled the UN representatives from the Sinai peninsula.
UN could not keep up its promise to Israel that suez canal will be kept open for trade.
http://www.mideastweb.org/israelafter1967.htm
(Against this background, in Mid-May, 1967, Egyptian President Gamal Nasser again closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping and dismissed the UN peace force from the Sinai Peninsula. The United States failed to live up to its guarantees of freedom of the waterways to Israel.)
Arab nations had, until very recently, never acknowledged the very existence of Israel.
This is from the same URL:

(At the UN, PLO Chairman Ahmed Shukhairy announced that ``if it will be our privilege to strike the first blow`` the PLO would expel from Palestine all Zionists who had arrived after 1917 and eliminate the state of Israel. Nasser said on May 27, ``Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight.`` On May 28, he added: ``We will not accept any...coexistence with Israel...Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel....The war with Israel is in effect since 1948.``)
As to your allegation of Israel` s military strength, here is the reality (from the above URL):

(On paper, Israel had almost as many aircraft as the Egyptians, but the Israeli aircraft were mostly old, and even the Super-Mirages were no match for the Mig-21 fighters acquired by Egypt from the USSR. On paper, the IDF had a huge number of ``tanks.`` However, while Syrians and Egyptians were equipped with late model Soviet heavy tanks, most of the Israeli ``tanks`` were in fact tiny French AMX anti-tank vehicles, and the heavy tanks were refurbished WWII Sherman tanks fitted with diesel engines.)

(Balfour was corrupt and gave the minority population (Jews) the majority of the land. Even you (probably) can see thats not right.)
It is not as simple as that. You may read all about the Balfour agreement in this URL:
http://www.mideastweb.org/mebalfour.htm
``The Tibetan example doesn`t measure up to Palestine. Peace is actually viable in Tibet. ``
Peace is not viable in Tibet. It is enforced by brute force by China. Peace will fail the day the newer generation of Tibetans opt for violence and do not heed the advice of Dalai Lama.
Sridhar

Dr Riq

Sorry for being late.

Both sides have lots of arguements. And nothing has come out of those arguements in so many years. Only the ordinary Palestinians have suffered. The Palestinians can continue in their struggle. Neither you nor I can stop them. Similarly, we can not resolve this conflict in 10-20 Interacts.

My opinion, at best, was based on ground realities. There is always a time to move on and forget the bad dreams of past. This requires courage and boldness.

Israel is willing to hand back the West Bank and Gaza with minor modifications. But the Palestinians (including the radical groups) must give it some confidance of doing so.

The answer simply lies in the Palestinians to lay down their arms and give that feeling of safety to Israel. Believe me, it is good for them. They will save their future generations.

Mandela did not take up arms. In fact, in this new world, violence does not seem to pay. Unless you are a powerful state itself. Non-state actors have no chance. This is the reality of life.

NHK

DR_Riq
//....Of course they have military might. Thats not much, really, to be proud of...//

I am not sure if Israeli Army was that big and mighty in 60`s - nevertheless, their victory over arabs was definitely something to be proud of. Probably first time in history of jews - they successfully defended themselves against gang of vicious determined enemies.

Anyway - Israel`s aggressive push on Palis is par the course. If the situation is reveresed and Arabs had the military advantage - they would be doing exactly the same thing against the jews, probably worse.

In fact - that`s exactly what Aabs were planning to do when the ganged up on the jews in 67 war. They thought they had the military strength and they can take advantage of it and throw the jews out to the sea - once and for all. It`s another matter that the Arabs lost miserably and continue to loose ever since.

Now the shoe is on the other foot. Israel is taking full advantage of their superior military might. If tomorrow, by any chance, arabs attain the same military might and jews become weak - then arabs will do exactly the same to the jews.

SO quit whining on behalf of palis. They are getting killed now and they will kill back as soon as they get a chance.

This tribal warfare has been going on for past hundreds of years and will go on into any foreseeable future. It`s in their bedouin blood and culture, it`s part of who they are. These people will never ever learn to live together.

Alas, Chowk is a noble attempt to unite the subcontinent through good-natured discussions between the intelligencia; but occasionally one or two nationalistic idiots come and spoil the party. You, Sridhar, are a prime example. Pat yourself on the back, you can manage to perform such a task.

WHEN I said ``On that argument, you then have NO reason to critisise suicide bombers; they are being unjustified in killing civillians, sure, but so is the Israeli army in killing civillians too. So everything cancels out and its allright in the end?``
I was actually pointing out the illogical arguments as proposed by `nazarhayatkhan`. They are as illogical as the theory I put forth. In demonstrating faux, one has to go to the extremes to demonstrate why something is wrong. Only then do people see, through hypothetical extremes, that the argument is invalid. But it seems that you failed to see this simple point! What stupidity!

But just for the record, even if you still do not understand what I am trying so hard to tell you, I am actually against the civillian killing of suicide bombers. Yup, you heared right, even a /muslim/ can be logical.

``Muslim countries tried invading Israel in the 60s and got whipped by that small nation.`` Small nation? need I not remind you that although Israel has a population roughly that of the city of London, it has the 4th largets military in the world? That military spending in Israel is so great? That the aid benefitted to Israel form the US is greater that US aid spent on the whole of the African continent? Of course they have military might. Thats not much, really, to be proud of.

``NOw, muslims can`t have the balls to confront Israel directly, hence the suicide bombers, a cowardly way of reacting. Why can`t they adopt the Gandhian way of ``Satyagraha``? I can assure u it will be much appreciated all over the world even if it does not yield results.``
Read my article again. And if the answer doesn`t hit you, read it yet again, more /slowly/.

``If the land belonged to Palestine just because they have been living there, it could also be argued that it belongs to Israel historically and now in reality.``
Right, so the fact that people living on a land for countless generations, still isn`t saying to you that its /their/ land, just because a piece of paper says it isn`t?
By your argument, India was never really India, it was just some land with people living on it. In fact, no India actually belongs to the British because a piece of paper in colonial times says they won it form the Portuguese!
For your benefit, Im being sarcastic. You can have India back. I was kidding.

``Israel had legal accession to the land thr` Balfour agreement.`` Its Balfour that this trouble started in the first place to begin with. My point is, this `agreement` never actually took into consideration the people living there already... remember ``A land with no people for a people with no land``? Balfour was corrupt and gave the minority population (Jews) the majority of the land. Even you (probably) can see thats not right.

The Tibetan example doesn`t measure up to Palestine. Peace is actually viable in Tibet. With Palestine, its a perpetual war, although its not seen in that light, because all the casualties are on the Palestinian side, not Israeli. Even if Palestine vied for peace officially, Palestinians would still be killed daily, much like what is happening today, despite the absense of a suicide attack in recent times.

Now can we all stop dismissing each other as `evil muslims/evil hindus` and start arguing properly. Fundamentalism is a real poison that keeps on persisting in Chowk. Lets start being civillised.

re:#91 by Dr_Riq
You seem to have given yourself the title of Dr. May we know a Dr of what? Illogical thinking perhaps.
``On that argument, you then have NO reason to critisise suicide bombers; they are being unjustified in killing civillians, sure, but so is the Israeli army in killing civillians too. So everything cancels out and its allright in the end?``
Wow!
By this crappy logic, Hindus in India should contiinue their pogrom ala Gujarat in order to cancel out the arocities perpetrated by muslim rulers on them over the centuries.
Except muslims, most non-muslims wil not accept your logic. Israel is a state with an army and will defend itself as it seems fit. Suicide bombers are just terrorists. Muslim countries tried invading Israel in the 60s and got whipped by that small nation. NOw, muslims can`t have the balls to confront Israel directly, hence the suicide bombers, a cowardly way of reacting. Why can`t they adopt the Gandhian way of ``Satyagraha``? I can assure u it will be much appreciated all over the world even if it does not yield results.
The reason is: violence is in the muslim blood. You guys can`t think of sharing and living. I am sure if Palestenians gave up violence, some kind of compromise could be worked out with Israel.

``Right, so a people should just lay back whilst their land is being taken from them, henious crimes against humanity (some evidence even points to genocidical acts) against them, et al, because it would have benifitted them... ``
If the land belonged to Palestine just because they have been living there, it could also be argued that it belongs to Israel historically and now in reality. Israel had legal accession to the land thr` Balfour agreement. I am not sure where the illegality crept in. Not even the Israelis are saying the Palestenians don`t belong there but until very recently, most muslim nations had been saying that Israel had no right to even exist.
And, yes, Nazar Sahib is right about Palestenians having wasted more than 50 years on violence. They have nothing to show after all that violence. So, logically it makes sense to change your tactics and sue for peace. I will cite the Tibetan struggle as an example. Their land too was grabbed by China. They too are against a major power in the area but their struggle has been noted all over the world and Dalai Lama is a very respected figure. China is slowly coming to the view that Tibetans need more autonomy. Not even Dalai Lama is talking about independence, knowing fully well that is not realpolitik.
Sridhar

#76 nazarhayatkhan

Sorry for replying to a comment you made some time ago; you may want to read back to refresh your memory.

Anyway.

So the summation that history is unfair and illogical justifies that a minority people `deserve` the majority of the land? If something deplorable and illegal has happenned on one side of the world, and/or in another time frame altogether, this justifies the crimes committed by the Zionists present-day?
You know perfectly well that that is utter tripe and nonsense. On that argument, you then have NO reason to critisise suicide bombers; they are being unjustified in killing civillians, sure, but so is the Israeli army in killing civillians too. So everything cancels out and its allright in the end?

``All states that came out of the Ottoman were artificial and arbitrary. Statesmanship is to have the farsight and wisdom to assess correctly and cash on the oppurunity blah blah blah...``
And this has /what/ relevance to rebutting my point?

``The Arabs living in Israel have full rights.`` ... Im not even going to start on that one.

``the Palestinians are on the wrong track and have wasted 56 years. They could keep on wasting more years. Living in peace with Israel would have benefitted them a lot...``
Right, so a people should just lay back whilst their land is being taken from them, henious crimes against humanity (some evidence even points to genocidical acts) against them, et al, because it would have benifitted them...
Right, now, am I the only one who wonders where you got this stuff from?

``About the return of all Palestinians into Israel? It has a demographic element to it. If Israel does this and still wants to have a democracy, it will turn into a minority once again. It does not want that to happen. It will permit some genuine cases to return. ``
Good point. The thing is, the land wasn`t Israeli to begin with! Whole communities were living there; frightened away by the shadow of Zionism. Israel takes the land, Jews suddenly become the majority (because they were the /only/ ones remaining!). Solution? Give back the land rightfully! That way, although Israel would become smaller, it would still have a majority Jewsih population, and thus will be more flexible in excersising Thalmud law. Which is, understandably, what it wants to do.
How to give back the land? 2 NATIONS!

amit #87: ``It is no different from the contradiction in Romair criticizing Israel for not being secular while he is a strong champion of two nation theory in the subcontinent.``

Hmmm.....quite a bit of nonsense here.

I have actually supported the Cabinet Mission Plan, where Muslims in South Asia would have been part of a federation, with certain fixed representation in the center. It was accepted by Gandhi, Jinnah and the British. After that the Muslims could have seen how things developed in South Asia. If BJP-type parties took over (which they eventually did), they would have security against them, and could demand their own state. If not they could live comfortably within a federation.

Even now, I think their should be an economic union in South Asia, provided no land remains occupied.

Jews have a right to demand their own state, if they are being prosecuted by people because of their religion. Why shouldn`t they? Suppose the BJP completely starts running India, and starts threatening Indian Muslims left and right, because they are Muslims. Don`t you think the Indian Muslims, at that point, would have a right to their own state. Any society that cannot protect its minority, then cannot deny that minority a separate state. If the world cannot protect the Jews, then they should indeed have their own state. Same is the case for Muslims in India, and Hindus in Pakistan.

What the Jews don`t have a right to is demanding a state on someone else`s land.

Well.I would like to add here some more.You simply said terrorist to muslims.But you never thought what circumstances made for them and they changed all the realtiy though it is not allowed in islam whatsoever they are doing against jews or america none even a single bit.But i`ve seen many ppl just make decision without knowing the circumstances.Now can you answer who is responsible for IRAQ.I accept here afghanistan was the land of terrorist but what about IRAQ,after america has admitted that they have made biggest mistake ever.
Who is responisble for present condition of IRAQ?

re:#87 by amit
If Jews had not been persecuted, they would have been well assimilated in their respective countries and theoratically at least, there would have been no takers for a jewish homeland. Nazi persecution ensured that Israel became a historical reality.
Now, for all the compassion (and money)that overflows from muslim countries for the Palestenian cause, how many of these countries have offered to absorb the Palestenians in their own territory?
These muslim nations continue to send terrorists, money etc into Palestine but have never ever offered territory for the Palestenians to settle down.
It all then boils down to an ideological and religious war. Muslim nations had gone on the war in the 60s to destroy Israel but latter came out victorious. Now it is a lot more powerful and is able to defend itself. As i already said, the only way to defend terrorism is be on the offensive, something that India can learn.
I have no sympathy for terrorists and none whatsoever for Yasser Arafat and the country that he dreamed of liberating one day.
My question is: have muslims ever demonstrated that they can live in peace anywhere in the world when they are not in a majority and have to share space with other religions/cultures. We see friction in India, in Thailand, in Denmark now and the world over. Their terrorist A$$ is being kicked in Palestine and i am happy about it.
Sridhar

#80
I hear the resident chauvinists want them renamed american-pakistanis :)

#68
Agree on jews claiming a chosen status engender envy derision or both. But the more important reason for the historic animosity is xtians think of them as having betrayed jesus & refused his msg.

Re conversion, Madonna was in Israel recently on a pilgrimage (madonna was a jew, wasn`t she?). AFAIK she hasn`t officially converted. From what I read some jews would welcome her & some wouldn`t if she chose to convert.

Re:rsridhar#78

I have a fundamental dislike of parochial ideologies and nationalities that are based on race or religion, whether it is two-nation theory or zionism. In my view, both are equivalent in being exclusionary and divisive between people living in the same land. Both these ideologies have caused tremendous harm, suffering and devastation. Today the leader of Mohajirs in Pakistan, Altaf Hussain says that two nation theory was a blunder, when it was the mohajirs who wanted Pakistan. That shows the hollowness of that ideology. Zionism is no different from that. It has devastated the lives of Palestinians, turned jews into brutal oppressors who can`t live in peace in their own country and are caught in a never ending cycle of an ``eye for an eye``.

From what I have read from your interacts, you are not exactly a great fan of Pakistan or partition. If you cannot support Pakistan for breaking away on religious grounds, how can you support Israel for establishing a religious state excluding other people? It is a contradiction. It is no different from the contradiction in Romair criticizing Israel for not being secular while he is a strong champion of two nation theory in the subcontinent.

There is no doubt that jews have suffered a lot and deserve a country. They should be the first people to understand the pain of being dispossessed and treated like a second class citizen. Yet they have implemented a rigid religious state where non-jews are basically second-class citizens and Arabs are third class citizens. Palestinians cannot even live docile lives if they want, because the Israelis constantly want their land. At the least, Isreal should withdraw to the 1967 borders and give Palestinians their own country, compensate people who cannot return to their homes and make peace with these people.

NHK #various: Talk to your nearest Rabi on the subject.¡¨

I thought you were the nearest Rabi :-) Thanks for the info, though.

It still does not clear up the anamoly of how an orthodoxy, which is run by European Jews, i.e. Jews not from the promised land, can demand a return to the promised land. While simultaneously, suggesting that one¡¦s mother has to be Jewish, to be considered Jewish.

``The Arabs living in Israel have full rights``

I think you are over-simplifying the issue. How familiar are you with the Arabs living in Israel, outside of what you have read on the website you mentioned?

To the best of my knowledge, and after having talked, in detail with Arabs (Christian and Muslims), who just moved from Israel/Palestine, there are actually four levels of Arabs in Israel:

- The first group are the Arab Jews, who have full and equal rights in Israel. They, along with other non-white Jews (I believe) constitute the majority of the Jewish population. However, they are generally behind, in all fields, in comparison to White Jews. I don¡¦t think any of them has ever been a PM of Israel.

- The second group are the Arab Christian and Muslims who have been given full citizenship in Israel. They have almost the same rights as the Arab Jews. They are not allowed to have their relatives migrate to Israel, like the Arab Jews are. Other than that, they have full rights, and have their representatives in the Knesset.

- The third group are Arab Christians and Muslims who live in Jerusalem (and perhaps some other areas), but are not the citizens of Israel. Israel covets Jerusalem deeply. These Arabs have to have been living in Jerusalem, in the same house for hundreds of years. However these Arabs are not allowed to purchase any property, nor are they even allowed to add a room onto the houses they have owned for generations. They have to have a special permit to work, as well.

They have become H-1B type workers in their own land.

The Christian Arab I talked with told me that he wanted to get married, but could not add a room to his house. He would have to move to the occupied territories to get accommodation. However, if he moved, then he would lose his rights to work. He said there are Jews offering a lot of money to Arabs who will sell their house. And that life for Arabs has been made so frustrating that people end up selling their houses, and moving abroad.

- The fourth category are the Arabs who live in the occupied territories. These Arabs are basically of refugee status, and are considered under the occupation of Israel. Their rights are less than the rights of the Jerusalem Arabs. They primarily live in the West Bank and Gaza. Israel covets their land also, and has built housing societies all over their lands. Only Jews are allowed access to the roads that go to these housing societies (i.e. settlements).

``In my opinion, the Palestinians are on the wrong track and have wasted 56 years. They could keep on wasting more years. Living in peace with Israel would have benefitted them a lot.``¨

I think it is human nature to resist when someone occupies your land/house etc. If I came and tried to take over your house, I assume you would resist. Or would you just give it to me? Occupation should never be morally considered justifiable. Otherwise, all the qabza groups in Pakistan are legal.

However, the Palestinians should accept the inevitable, as you have suggested, and realize they have been defeated. Or at least, live to fight another day. I think most of them have accepted that. They are willing to agree to 22% of the total land that they once owned, before 1948. However, Israel is not even agreeing to that. The Palestine that Israel is agreeing to is a Buntastan with Israeli controlled areas. Kind of like giving Lahore to someone, while keeping control of the Mall Road and Defence and all entrances to the Motorway.

``What is this drama of a nation? The idea of nation states is once again getting vaguer in the world thanks to EU. An average man wants to simply live in peace and have a good life``

This is true, but the restrictions of a nation-state have been enforced more by Israel than anyone else. There are many Palestinians who are willing to live in one greater Israel. But Israel does not agree. Israel is thus unwilling to let the Arabs live in Israel. And it is unwilling to give them a viable state of their own.

¨About the return of all Palestinians into Israel? It has a demographic element to it. If Israel does this and still wants to have a democracy, it will turn into a minority once again. It does not want that to happen.``

Right of return is a concept that has been accepted by all Western nations. Eskimos in Canada are being compensated for any crimes and displacements against them. Native Americans in the USA have and are being compensated. As are abrigones in Australia. None of them are being forced to leave their lands, any longer. And are being given special rights in lands their ancestors owned.

The demographic element of Israel goes against the basic concept of secularism, that everyone seems to push (when it is suitable). If one believes in secularism (as I believe you do), then one cannot make decisions based on religious demographics. I am sure you will agree that the laws in Israel are some of the most non-secular in the world. Some of them, in my opinion, are based on religious apartheid. Based on growth rates, some day in the very distant future, the Arab Muslim citizens of Israel will outnumber the Jewish citizens. What will happen then? How will Israel control the demographics?

I think this whole conflict is the result of what happens when people of one religion make decisions purely on their own religious beliefs, and not on practical and fair reasoning. One can make an argument that the Jews who actually lived in the Middle East could have a right to their own state, in the area. But how in the world could a, ``White¨ European claim rights to land, where no one even looked like him/her.

I have always felt that the whole world, and the Jews, would have been much better off had they asked for a state in North America. Rather than rely on religion and ask for it in the Middle East. And even with an independent Palestine, I think the common man of the 22 Arab countries will just be marking his/her time waiting for their countries to get into the first world and then re-attacking Israel. And I am not sure whether 4 million Jews, in one country, will be able to take on 250 million Arabs, in 22 countries, indefinitely.

Israel would be well-advised to accept the 22% that the Palestinians want, and negotiate something on the right of return (perhaps by financially compensating the displaced Palestinians) and realize that its future lies in an alliance with its geographical neighbors, not with countries an ocean away.

It has been matter of fact that all the nations no matter jews,chirstian or anyother nation suffered vth problem against muslims.And this is all muslims fault rather ruling on them muslims made them rule on ourself.It wasn`t done intenionally it happened unintenionally.And in one other sense we can call it muslims mistakes when they didn`t confess whats going on around for what jews or christian or any third nation are forcing to favour them either in MIDDLE EAST or in SUB-CONTINENT.After ruling such a long time on world its embarrasing to ask other countries to do something in our country.No matter either we belong to pakistan,saudia arabia turkeey egypt syrea or anyother muslim country.
And i would like to add about the ruler of PHALISTINE.He never tried to get his country back for muslims rather giving it to isreal.
He is dead so better i would keep my mouth shut

re:#68 by amit
You seem to reduce the Jews to a single class of people: all ambitious, narrow minded blah blah blah.
This is far from the truth. Jews, like Hindus, are a disparte group. There are some very traditional jews while there are some very broad minded jews who do not care much about their religion and are very secular in their outlook. These jews have intermarried with other religious groups (one chinese Fellow i once knew, who was training to become an Orthopedician, married a jewish colleague). One of the things that some Jewish organizations in USA worry about is this group of secular jews who are just blending into the mainstream.

``As a people they are paranoid and are always trying to beat the system for their interests, perhaps as a result of their history of persecution.``
Let us just say that the Jewish lobby in USA is successful because they are focussed and united. Of late, Indian lobby is working with the Jewish groups, so Indians should not be complaining! Jews never forget (and rightly so) what happened to them over the last several centuries, especially what the Nazism did to them. This is not paranoia but good sense. India went through 8 centuries of exploitation and destruction at the hands of muslims yet Hindus have not build even a single memorial to their fallen heroes the way Jews have built a `` holocaust museum``. In the end, Hindus are plain stupid to think that the problem will go away because they don`t think about it. The age old antagonism of hindus versus muslims still exist but in a different form today. While it is good to make new friends, it is foolish to forget history and not learn any lessons from it.

``In the same vein, Isreali nationalism is a narrow religion/ethnicity based nationalism as compared to other democratic countries that have embraced secularism.``
You are again wrong here. Jews have for millenia dreamed of a homeland. So, that homeland had crystallized in their minds much before it became a historical reality. They are in a different category because they were so much persecuted over the ages and deserved a homeland. You can`t blame them for being persecuted! That is what u are doing. Should hindus in India then persecute the Parsees because they too are a close religious group (with narrow minded religious affiliations) and are immensely successful?
Israel is secular to the extent their law allows it to be. Israelis of Arabic origin can vote and have equal rights as far as i know. But, Israel is also fighting a battle against enemies who belong to a certain religious affiliations, so it can`t afford to be very liberal.

``Most Israelis know in their hearts that what they have done to the Palestinian people is wrong and unjust. Yet seldom do you hear any Israeli plan to compensate the Palestinians or try to work something out for them.``
Israel has retaliated to terrorism the way India retaliated to terrorism sponsored by the Paki army from across LOC. Only a lot more brutally and effectively. You can`t blame them for that. Terrorism has to be defeated in a brutal fashion. There is no other way.
Palestenian people brought it among themselves. Their cause may be just but killing innocent people thr` suicide bombers is not the way to fight for a cause. They could have looked at some peaceful ways of fighting for a cause, the way Gandhi did or Martin Luther King did. But they made a mistake in following the dictates of that terrorist Yasser Arafat. In the battle of brutality, only the more powerful wins. Palestenians brought it upon themselves by opting for a brute battle with the Goliath in the region.

``Our leadership starting with Gandhi focused on inclusion and secular ideals, which is why India is respected so much all over the world and is on the path to becoming a major world power``
China, not India, is the rising star and is being watched with interest (and not without some trepidation) in the West. Most people do not think India really matters. India, a major world power! That must be a joke. Living in India, u are perhaps divorced from reality. India just about manages to take on a puny little country like Pakistan which keeps giving it a lot of grief. Do u really think India can be a world power?
Sridhar

re:#69 by dost-mittar
``I do differ with you regard to the Hindus. I think that their docility is sometimes mistaken as tolerance. ``
Docility is better than stupidity. Palestenians are brave! What the heck, their youth is so brave that it is blowing itself away for a cause. Brave or Stupid? I think the latter.
Sridhar

just to point out to those who are perhaps understandably not aware: ``red indians`` are not referred to as such anymore. they are referred to as american indians or native americans now.

i understand that we grew up in a time where we read books that referred to them as such in pakistan, but to the native americans that i know, referring to them as ``red indians`` is derogatory, it`s like continuing to call an african-american a ``negro``. just thought i`d point that out. :)

NHK Various

This is a very interesting argument you make. Out of sick Ottoman Empire came Israel and Saudi. KSA is a big land ruled by an arbotrary tribe, but there was never any protest, except some inter-tribal conflics. But israel is different because 1) not muslims and 2) europeans (colonials). The nature of various regime from human rights perspective is irrelevant.

Jamshed # 70

Palestinians Vs Israel

This has to be seen in the historical perspective. Palestine is a geographical name (given by the Romans to the Kingdom of Israel & Judia) which was inhibited both the Arabs and Jews. The Jews were in majority. It is not to be confused with the ancient Philistine tribe that lived in areas around Gaza. So the Jewish people have a historical claim. Obviously the Jews have been exiled from there more than once.

Israel was as arbitrary a country as other countries in the Middle East. Their only figment of legitimacy is the UN. The same legitimacy holds true for Israel.

As for the only on-going oppression of the Palestinianbs and the suicide bombings by the Palestinians in Israel, it is a chicken & egg story. Both sides have their justifications. If the Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hizbullah refuse to even accept Israel, what do you expect Israel to do? The Muslim militants have only brought more miseries to their common man.

At times, I get surprised why the Japenese & Germans after the WW2 did not take up arms against the conquerer - the USA. Instead, they lived under its occupation, rebuilt themselves and are now again on the world stage. The Muslims are passing though a phase of their existance where instead of chasing shadows, they should look inwards, reform themselves, have an accommodating outlook as citizens of this earth and rise out of ignorance.

History is cruel but the sensible course is to get into the flow of history and cash on; rather than flow against it and destroy yourself.

Should the Red Indians take up arms against USA or plan to rule the USA through the system of USA?

nhk

Dr Riq # 73

History moves with its own momentum & forces. It is neither fair nor logical. Why the small Saud Tribe got the entire Arabia? Or why the Shareef of Mecca guys got Trans Jordan and Iraq? Or why Karzai is ruling Afghanistan?

All states that came out of the Ottoman were artificial and arbitrary. Statesmanship is to have the farsight and wisdom to assess correctly and cash on the oppurunity. After all, the Arabs & The Jews are the descendents of same Abraham. The Jews had their own kingdom centuries earlier and had a right. The Philistine tribe was just a small tribe. The term Palestine was coined by the Romans and it did not mean the place of the Philistine tribe.

The Arabs living in Israel have full rights. The Palestinians who left Israel in 1948 and disperesed to other Arab countries were never given citizenship rights. Hizbullah & Hamas still want to sink Israel into the sea.

In my opinion, the Palestinians are on the wrong track and have wasted 56 years. They could keep on wasting more years. Living in peace with Israel would have benefitted them a lot. What is this drama of a nation? The idea of nation states is once again getting vaguer in the world thanks to EU. An average man wants to simply live in peace and have a good life.

About the return of all Palestinians into Israel? It has a demographic element to it. If Israel does this and still wants to have a democracy, it will turn into a minority once again. It does not want that to happen. It will permit some genuine cases to return.

Obove is just a few jumbled up ideas. It actually needs more details and discussion. Wikipedia is good because it gives both sides of story unlike the pure Muslim sites or the pure Jewish sites.

More later if I get time.

nhk

Romair # 72

Conversion to Judaism.

As I said, in general terms, being of a Jewish mother is the consideration. But this is not the ONLY consideration. There are different sects with their own variations. It is a complex subject and a subject by itself.

Talk to your nearest Rabi on the subject.

nhk

There seems to be an in-built contradiction in an certain arguments that have been presented here:

It is very difficult to convert to Judaism. In an orthodox interpretation, one has to be born to a Jewish mother (?). It is also an orthodox interpretation that the Jews must return to their promised land of Israel, come hell or high water. I don`t know of any other religion that has concepts similar to these two.

If we assume the first to be true, then can the second be true? If all the Jews, in an orthodox manner need to have Jewish mothers, then how far did orthodox Judaism actually spread? One would assume, it could not have gone too far from its Middle Eastern origins. Unless Jewish females started marrying non-Jewish males, all over the world. Is that even allowed?

So if the orthodox belief is that orthodox Jews should return to the promised land, then wouldn`t that be limited to the Middle Eastern, ``Arab`` Jews (who constitute a majority in Israel). Where exactly does this place the, ``White`` Russian/European Jews, who are running the country, and actually laid its foundations? Are they all descendants of Jewish mothers?

Although very informative and readable through the simplicity, one can`t help but start to cringe whilst reading at some of the little details you`ve forgot to mention. The `best deal the Arabs/Palestinians would ever get` was rejected, yes, but you make it sound as if this decision stemmed purely from a natural distaste of Jews by the Arab/Muslim world. Yet we can easily see no such distaste existed then, as the Ottomans, like the other Muslim empires were tolerant to the people. This repulsion of the Jews stemmed purely from the Zionist movement; and we all know why.
Well then, what to make of the rejection of the first UN proposal to partition Palestine into two nations? Simply, because the majority of the land would be awarded to the Jews, whilst a minority of the land to the Palestinians. The Jews being a minority in the area; the proposal was soundly rejected by anyone sane and unbiased.
The UN`s illogical decision probably arose from a number of reasons; Zionist pressure in the UN, sympathy for the people after the Holocaust, etc.
However, any people would have rejected this proposal: sound logic, which I guess you dont have, following your exclusion of this `small` fact.
And get better sources than Wikipedia next time.

NHK,

Thanks for writing this very informative article. Keep it up and let us know more!

NHK
``A male convert needs to undergo a ritual circumcision,``

ha ha.. this would explain paucity of ``adult`` male conversions, unless this was done anyways for other reasons, such as being a muslim or medical. muslims dont convert to other religious, so what is left is medical amputees, and women. very interesting.

overall, the votes are in according to the party lines. eastern side has a more or less sympathetic view of jewish history, and the western side, holds it with suspicion. eastern side is more or less ingnorant. the western has some built-in biases although they should be as ignorant (due to lack of interaction). they seem to be searching for problems of rusky jews.

i have rusky friend who has absolutely hilarious tales of life in rusky military service as well as israel. these ruskys have some sense of humor. he claims that he was on a train to afganistan with his unit, and was felt really chosen, when the CO asked all the chosen people to get off the train. he also tells some interesting tales of beardos disturnbing everyones sleep in el-al flights by theis loud prayers. he and other ruskies are funny and really tough folks.

Dear Nazar Hayat!
I am bit surprised to read this little history of the Jews with such a simple mention of the simplicity of the Jews.

The primary argument for Jewish ocucpation of Palestine is that God promised them this land. and u also extend them courtesy by saying that they deserve it for the 400 yrear persecution. WHAT???

Who else does nt deserve it? The red indians in North Amercia? The aboriginals in Canada? The inca descendents in peru? the natives in brazil? even the natives in india now declared the shudders? The history of the world is littered with tribes and nations uprooted, destroyed and mutilated one after another. Why Jews? and Who says they lived in this land? The concept of diaspora is crazy. These jews collect people from russia and ukraine, uganda and sudan, amercia and even china, bring them to Palestine declare them the ``returning Jews``, gobble up palestinan land and then weep about why the world hates them? Some cheek.

The fact is, Jews in the US media and print industry have come up with this huge propaganda machine that churns up these simple n touching history books about how miserable the history of the Jewish people has been to hide their naked aggression, exploitation and massacre of Palestinian people.

The fact is religious stories r used by all... Muslims, hindus, jews or christians but behind most is land grabbing, persecution or economic expansionism. The only thing religion does is to provide the aggressor with conviction that cannot be reasoned.

What if u claim tomorrow that God promised u the whole of USA in your dream? go see if Bush is going to give it away to u!! The capture of Palestine has only been done by the willing and consenting participation of the Britshers n the french and later supported by the American as a result of the financial lending that the Jews did to the Allies during the first and second world wars.

I have met several Jewish engineers and most except maybe one have turned out to be nice decent people. However, when it comes to zionism, and defendingf what has been happenning in Palestine, as a group the Jewish community in Palestine has been brutal, monstrous and deserve to be lambasted for their hideous crimes against humanity.

I would appreciate if u can spell out what u think of the recent history of the ocucpation of Palestine. With your background and experience, u should nt come up with this simple fairy tale of the poor Jews history of hte world story,

Regards,
jamshed nazar

conversion:

The question of jewish conversion reminds me of two cases. One is that of the late comedian Samy Davis Junior who had successfully converted to judaism. He always used to get laughs by saying how he belonged to the triple minority of blacks, jews and one-eyeds. The second is about this Hindu in Bombay who was shown in a documentary recently on Indian jews. He claims that his inner voice told him that he was a jew. The rabbi refused to accept him but he continues to practice all jewish rituals and prayers at his home and continues his struggle to be accepted as a jew.


amit:
I agree with you re. the jews. I think that they are brilliant tacticians but not very strategic in their thinking, although there are many exceptions, like the Israeli Labour leader Shimon Perez. They have to recognize that they cannot live in a hostile environment until eternity. And how long will the US public let the tail wag the dog in the US-Israeli relationship? An independent and secure Israel may be in the US interests but not a hostile Arab and Muslim world. And despite what the propagandists say, even OBL has no desire to destroy America, only wanting it to stop interfering in the middle east by imposing Israel and unpopular despots on its people.

I do differ with you regard to the Hindus. I think that their docility is sometimes mistaken as tolerance. I believe that it was Gandhi who said that Hindus are cowards and Muslims are bullies or something like that. Like all stereotypings, there is an element of truth to the statement, despite too much generalisation.

Nazar Sahib,

I think there are two main reasons behind why jews have a trouble history. First of all, they believe that they are the ``chosen people``. This is a form of racism/superiority complex that ticks off other people.

Secondly, jews are a very shrewd and cunning people who can play politics very well. Maybe this trait has evolved in them as a survival mechanism. As a people they are paranoid and are always trying to beat the system for their interests, perhaps as a result of their history of persecution. An example is the jewish lobby in US including the neo-cons. As a result, they are smart but short-sighted in nature and very clannish about supporting each other against non-jews. In the same vein, Isreali nationalism is a narrow religion/ethnicity based nationalism as compared to other democratic countries that have embraced secularism. The only other country based on similar parochial ideology is Pakistan, which is hardly a success. The narrow minded behavior of jews/israelis creates bad blood with non-jewish people with whom they interact and perpetuates the cycle of hatred against them.

Most Israelis know in their hearts that what they have done to the Palestinian people is wrong and unjust. Yet seldom do you hear any Israeli plan to compensate the Palestinians or try to work something out for them. They don`t even offer Isreali citizenship for fear of losing jewish identity. I would contrast the behavior of jews with hindus. In the past 1000 years, hindus have been dumped on as well, in terms of suffering centuries of muslim and british imperial rule.Yet it is a very small minority among hindus that craves for revenge or supports narrow hindu nationalism. If anything, mainstream hinduism emphasizes reconciliation and secularism. Our leadership starting with Gandhi focused on inclusion and secular ideals, which is why India is respected so much all over the world and is on the path to becoming a major world power.

Romair,

I know a few Russian Jews myself. The ones I know tend to be quite fanatical in their support for Israel...although they had some charming tales about being extended great courtesy by Muslims in Central Asia during Soviet times...some real horror stories about the conduct of Russian troops during the Afghan war as well. Despite our political differences, I can`t help but think how similar our mindsets are. That`s not necessarily a good thing for either of us, of course.

From what they tell me, their migration is all about finding jobs. Although Israel has capital and industry (esp. high tech), it simply doesn`t have enough jobs to fill the amount of skilled labor coming in from the ex soviet republics. How`s the tech scene in Toronto now days anyway?

Escapist # 64

May be atheist was too strong a word. Faisal has a detached academic interest in religions which he considers metaphysical philosophies.

nhk

Does anyone have any information on how many Jews, who migrated to Israel, are willing to stay there.

We get a lot of Russian applicants for jobs. And nearly everyone has an identical resume. They studied in Russia, got Ph.Ds, migrated to Israel. Lived in Israel for a few years, and then migrated to North America. This seems to be the norm, rather than the exception.

Israel has a religiously-based immigration policy, and social policy. If one is Jewish one can migrate to Israel, through a phone call, from anywhere. Muslims and Christians, however, have three statuses in Israel. This includes those whose families have been living in places for Jerusalem for hundreds of years.

Israel`s majority, ``White`` Jewish population (I believe) consists (consisted) of Russian Jewish immigrants. Is there a trend there of those with qualitications migrating out, due to the violence?

NHK

So Faisal is now Atheist?
Or is it Zafar..

May Allah swt give all of us guidence towards the true path.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

First of all i would like to appreciate this article.The one and only article which had made me impress.
Well First of all i would like to add about the character of YASIR ARAFAT.
Well you were right at there he never worked to get the phalistine back rather allowing the isralies to take this all with more comfortably.
And about the history of jews i would like to add some about muslims where did muslims make big mistake when they just left the hitler alone rather giving him big hand.And that was the big turn when all jews survived and moreover Americans allowed them to get in when they were kicked out from germans.Now you can check their position they are most powerfull religios nation than any other in the world.They are strong wealthly politically warly and even in sports.Its all about your observation just sit back and turn your Television on and change the channel.You will watch them on star sports Tensports Axn HBO or any channel which is runing on your tv......

Religions themselves are baloney. Conversions are even more. We make many choices in life. The last choice in choosing your religion might not always be the best. I know a guy (indian hindu) in my old school. He hung around a bunch of smoking, screw-around types muslims, had them as roommates for sometime, and ultimately became a muslim. Totally confused, he dropped out of school. The only thing he ever does is to go to the mosque, come back and smoke and talk BS.

Blasphemer,

ROTFL...insipid? You want a lively response then stop touting such tired old harangues.

The *exile* of Jewish tribes (who eventaully became a part of Muslim society anyway ...right up untill Ottoman times) is not the same as what the few Jewish tribes and Pagans had in mind for the early Muslims.

Thank God for urstruly, I can always depend on him to produce a knee-jerk reaction.

Friend # 48

(As far as I know, non-Jews can not convert to Judaism! Is that true? )

The Jews do not seek conversions. Essentially, the mother has to be a Jew. But there are different sects within Judaism with different procedures. Overall, it is a very cimbersome procedure.

You may like to get more details from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_conversion#Conversion_to_Judaism

I am reproducing some text below:

``Jewish law has strict guidelines for accepting new converts to Judaism (a process called ``giur``). According to Jewish law, which is still followed as normative by Orthodox Judaism and most of Conservative Judaism, potential converts must want to convert to Judaism for its own sake, and for no ulterior motives. A male convert needs to undergo a ritual circumcision, and there has to be a commitment to observe the 613 commandments and Jewish law. A convert must accept Jewish principles of faith, and reject the previous theology that he or she had prior to the conversion. Ritual immersion in a small pool of water known as a mikvah is required , and the convert takes a new Jewish name and is considered to be a son or daughter (in spirit) of the biblical patriarch Abraham, and a male is called up in that way to the Torah.

The Reform Judaism and Conservative Judaism movements are lenient in their acceptance of converts. Many of their members are married to non-Jews, and these movements make an effort to welcome the spouses of Jews who seek to convert. This issue is a lightning rod in modern day Israel as many immigrants from the former Soviet Union are technically not Jewish.``

As for their being a closed society and considering themselves superior, I can only say that they do not question the other`s faiths nor do they interfere in other`s beliefs. Actually, their this attitude of being confidently self-contained offends the others who think that they are too proud or arrogant.

If you seriously get into their community with sincererity and honesty, they will begin to place you higher than even other Americans. (if you are in US)

I got interested in this topic because my son who graduated from US had almost converted to Judaism if he was not an atheist. He was truly impressed by them and felt most comfortable with them.

nhk

Vertex #44

An insipid response, just as I expected.

But you are right. The world can draw its own conclusions about Mohammed and Islam from the facts presented to them. The facts about the extermination of the Jewish tribes are irrefutable.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Muzamil # 54

The mention of the three pre-islamic goddesses was in the historical context of linking up the process of evolution of faiths based on Judaism. (it was not in the theological context)

This hostorical context is subscribed to by Dr. Fazalur Rahman, the ex-head of Central Institute of Islamic Research of Pakistan.

You may like to reach further details and credentials of Fazlur Rahman at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fazlur_Rahman

nhk

Mr. Khan,

The problem with some of the liberal muslims is that in order to present themselves as liberals they try to find faults with the basic principles of islam or with the prophet of islam. the incident about laat, munat and Uzza is one example of it. The book mentioned is a book of history and is not that authentic. It is possible that some of the incidents mentioned in the book are right but it does not mean that whatever is said in the book is wholesome true. If you want to read the commentary, it is better to open Qura`an and read the commentary about sura najam. One good option is to read Maulana Shabeer Usmani`s commentory.

I was wondering that why is that the author choose such a contoaversial topic. Writing about jews does not requires this topic to be discussed.

re:#49 by nazarhayatkhan
Thanks for your post.
Sridhar

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Jang # 45

There were estimated 20,000 Jews in India in 1948. Most of them have migrated to Israel with now estimated population at 5000. These are called Bene Israel Jews.

Please read the details available at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bene_Israel

Some basic informatrion is as folllows:

``The Bene Israel (``Sons of Israel``) are a group of Jews who, in the mid-twentieth century, lived primarily in Bombay, Kolkata, Delhi and Ahmadabad. The native language of the Bene Israel is Marathi, while the Cochin Jews of southern India speak Malayalam.``

Total population: 65,000 (est.)
Significant populations in: Israel 60,000 (est.)
Bombay area 4000 (est.)
Kolkata < 200 (est.)
Delhi < 200 (est.)
Ahmadabad < 200 (est.)
Other English-speaking countries 2,000 (est.)

nhk

Strongspirit # 43

For Ashkenazi Jews, please read in detail at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazim

``Ashkenazi Jews or Ashkenazic Jews, also called Ashkenazim , are Jews who are descendants of Jews from Germany, Poland, Austria and Eastern Europe. In historical times, Ashkenazi Jews usually spoke Yiddish or Slavic languages such as (now extinct) Knaanic.

Since the 19th century, many of them have emigrated to other countries such as France, the United States and, recently, Israel.``

nhk

Rsridhar # 47

(Sarah, Abraham`s wife begot Isaac, whose descendents are jews.
Ishmael, whom Abraham begot thr` Haagar (the Egyptian maidservant), was the first among the tribe of Islam)

(How come then the Jews became such achievers, so much so that despite forming less than 1% of total population on earth,)

You are absolutely correct. Ishmael can be said to be the ancestor of Arab Muslims & Isaac of the Arab Jews. Both were sons of Abraham.

However, in general terms, now the Muslims are from different ethnicities worldwide. And different cultures.

The Jews are good achievers because they have had a strong scholarly culture - they have also inherited a good business acumen just like their fellow Arabs. And being always a minority, they have had a strong sense of community support. Similarly, having a worldwide diospora, due to exiles & persecutions, they always have had worldwide contacts - something that contributed to their success in business.

nhk

NHK,
I agree that Jews have proven themselves to be an enterprising group. However, they also appear to be one of the most exclusivist groups of people. As far as I know, non-Jews can not convert to Judaism! Is that true?

Even though you claim Judaism to be non-predatory, some of the sections of Old testament are disturbing to read. In several places it mentions massacre of opposing non-jew tribes.

Basic premise of Judaism is that god created (or chose) them as special people and rest of the people were somehow ``non-special`` in some sense.
That belief got inherited by Christians and Muslims too..

Somehow, current followers of Judaism make me uncomfortable. Many of them think themselves to be a super race..

Blasphemer,

The whole world can believe whatever it wants...it will anyway.

Insofar as genocide is concerned, that`s exactly what the pagan Arabs and some Jewish tribes had in mind for the Muslims: a complete extermination.

some links about jews in india, where they were not hated or persecuted.

several seem to hang around in mumbai and adjoining konkan area, they speak marathi, the local language, and play cricket, but have strange names like ezikel and ralph, but last names ending in kar. now, there are pawwala (catholic) ralphs, but they speak some kind of english and a smattering of konkani (catholics of mumbai have a habit of saying man after every word, similar to the jamaican mon). apparently these guys, even after immigrating to israel continue to play cricket, bridge and carrom, and stage ghati plays (BTW cricket, bridge, carrom and plays defines ghatis for the uninformed.).



http://www.bh.org.il/Communities/Archive/BeneIsrael.asp
http://us.rediff.com/news/2003/sep/11spec.htm
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/indians.html

re: this article
An interesting article. A quick synopse of Jewish history.
What Nazar Sahib failed to mention (and correct me if i am wrong) was that muslims and jews are in a historical sense, cousins.
Sarah, Abraham`s wife begot Isaac, whose descendents are jews.
Ishmael, whom Abraham begot thr` Haagar (the Egyptian maidservant), was the first among the tribe of Islam.
http://www.jesuscult.com/Genealogy.htm
How come then the Jews became such achievers, so much so that despite forming less than 1% of total population on earth, they have produced 18% of Nobel Laureates (of course, comparison to Hindus is even more stark; more than 1 bilion Hindus have hardly produced a handful of Nobel Laureates).
Is it Genes? Is it their religion that places such high premium on achievements? One wonders.
A list of Nobel Laureates of Jewish descent can be read at this website:
http://www.afterbug.com/jewish_hall_of_fame.html
The most famous of scientist, Albert Einstein, was a jew. I did not know Henry Kissinger is a jew. That was news to me. Boris Pasternak, the famous author of War and Peace, was also a jew.

Nazar Sahib said:
``Historically, whichever society had welcomed the Jews to live in peace with it, it had gained not only in terms of scholarship and knowledge but also in terms of commerce, trade and wealth creation. So could the Middle East.``
Wise words.
USA benefitted immensely from the Jewish exodus from Europe during the second World war and Hitler`s contemptuous referral of Science in those days as ``Jewish science``. In a race to make an atom bomb (later came to be called ``The Manhatten Project``), Jews played an important role.
It is now well known that during April of 1933, Adolf Hitler passed the first anti-Jewish law that stripped ``non-Aryan`` scientists of their post,causing over 100 physicist to flee Germany. Szilard was one of these scientist who relocated to England. In 1938, Szilard came to the United States and learned about the discovery of fission. Since he was not well known in the United States, he seeked the help and the fame of Albert Einstein. Together, they wrote a letter to President Roosevelt and asked for research money in order to study fission. On December 2, 1942, Szilard and Enrico Fermi achieved the first controlled chain reactor at the University of Chicago. The Manhattan Project was started soon after that.
Albert Einstein (himself a Jew) played an important part in all this. He helped the United States to begin the same type of research of uranium and fission that was occurring in Germany. It was not until the day after the Pearl Harbor attack, December 6, 1941, that substantial funds were allocated to the research. These funds allowed Enrico Fermi (another scientist who migrated to US from Italy) to achieve the first controllable chain reaction. Einstein was never officially part of the Manhattan Project, but he was one of the scientists responsible for getting it started.
Jewish diaspora`s contribution to wealth in USA is legendary. And a tiny country like Israel today has more technology than India.
Sridhar

re:#34 by wahi
``Author contends ``Since the 14th century, the Muslim societies have been in a steady decline by virtue of their regressive and non-progressive nature;``. I am totally unclear as to how author came up with 14th century date. By 1707 Aurangzeb had set up the largest mughal empire in India. Turkish empire reached its zenith in mid 16th century during the time of Suleiman.``
Muslims seem to consider tyrants as heroes. Aurangzeb was a tyrant. He may have inherited a large kingdom from his father but he spent most of his life destroying art, architecture and left a legacy of hate. He killed his own brother Dara Shikoh, who was an intellectual and had translated Upanishad into Persian.
Your are entitled to your opinion but Aurangzeb does not hold a candle to Akbar or Ashoka.
Sridhar

Nazar,

There`s a theory that most Ashkenazic (European) Jews are not descendants of the original diaspora, but of the Khazars, a Turkic people who ruled southern Russia, and converted to Judaism. Any thoughts on that?

Vertex

It was you that invoked the word genocide, not me.

The whole world can draw conclusions about how peaceful a religion is that was founded on, and sanctifies, such a blood bath. The template was set, and it has been carried forth.

But it was a kind of genocide, for sure.

Wahi-to # 35

(``Since the 14th century, the Muslim societies have been in a steady decline by virtue of their regressive and non-progressive nature;``. I am totally unclear as to how author came up with 14th century date. By 1707 Aurangzeb had set up the largest mughal empire in India. Turkish empire reached its zenith in mid 16th century during the time of Suleiman)

In my opinion, 14 century is some kind of a watershed in the history. The Christian Europe had just begun to rise out of its Dark Ages & the the Muslim world had just begun its long journey into the Darkness that continues till today. With no Ijtahad, Islam had become static and the Muslims yearning for knowledge took a back seat.

Big Empires like the Aurangzeb do not necessarily mean dynamic societies - eventually all the Muslim empires missed out on the industrial revolution.

It is just an opinion. You are welcome to differ.

Please go through the following links and analyse the issue:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Europe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslims#Muslim_civilization

nhk

Blasphemer,

``Well, the fact that the Muslims actually carried out the genocide of those Jewish tribes, not the other way round, tells us who was really hunky and who was really dory ;-)``

har har...and the fact that the Muslims expelled and did not kill most Jews (except those of two tribes who were in open conspiracy against the Muslims, and even then it was the fighting men who were executed). So yes, it does tell us who rally was hunky and who was dory...har har...

Genocide would imply that Muslims were out to kill all Jews. Fact is, it was all about tribal alliances, and those tribes that gambled and lost, well...lost.

Various

For all that you ever wanted to know about the Judaism`s holy sciptures - Tanakh, Mishna, Talmud etc, please read the following and its further links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torah

nhk

tintingem # 28

(And that is what led to the rise of the Jewish community and was one of the reasons of the downfall of Muslim rule in Spain. )

I have not found any evidence of that. Please go through the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Spain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Spain

nhk

Various

The purpose of this article was not to prove any faith right - All faiths are good for their followers. Similarly, the Judaism & its history, its interaction with Greeks, Romans and then Europian Christianity and Middle Eastern Islam had to be only touched upon. Many issues getting just a one line space. It all had to be encapsulated in 2000 words.

A para that I deleted was very interesting. I could not help comparing some of the benign similarities of Judaism with another great philosophy Sanatana Dharma taking shape 3000 miles East about 4000 years ago. In essance, both have been non-predatory and knowledge-based meta-physical philosophies.

The similarities are as follows:

Both have had a strong scholarly tradition.
Both were not into preaching others & spreading the belief. (Jews are less than 13 million. The Dharma followers stayed within their geographical origin)
The Jews do not call others Heretics - Dharma believes that all paths lead to same destination.
Worship is non-obligatory in both Judaism & Dharma.
Dharma`s philosophy is to search for that One Brahman (Ultimate Reality) - Judaism believes in One God who should be questioned in search of the Truth.
Both have a strong cultural base.
Both considered themselves as a way of life.


nhk

One possible reason the Jews were not a very popular people was their fiercely independent streak which constantly led them into conflict ( often divinely reinforced) - with the Egyptians, the philistines ( not to be confused with the palestinians), the assyrians, the Babylonians, The Persians ( the story of ruth), and later on with the Greeks ( alexander brutally supressed them) and with the Romans who finally dispersed them often forcibly as slaves.....

The Jewish people always had a very strong intellectual tradition ( something the Muslims need to emulate ) and that combined with a propensity to trade and be involved in monetary flows and transaction - concentrated wealth and power in their hands in a far greater proportion to their population . This combined with a strong preservation instinct to preserve their distinct cultural, linguistic and religious identity often set them apart from the native population.....

The Jewish population has always been very strong in terms of monetary lending and finance ( a strong propensity to save) - and were the informal bankers and money lenders from posterity - Consequently they were relatively affluent - which the general population associated with ``usury`` and stories of Jesus trying to get rid of the money lenders`s in the Temple, medieval shakepearean plays about shylock, the prophet`s ban on ``usury in Medina... , and the strong influence of the rothschilds and other Jewish bankers in the european economy - often made them unpopular ....... The Pathans association with moneylending in the subcontinent has also been used as a link as one of the lost jewish tribes - holds little water since the pathans are a non-semitic people unlike the jewish people......

just some thoughts.......

Mantolives,

``no amount of pain that such a realization carries with it, can justify the kind of glee that this guy exhibits... that you appear to celebrate it only discredits you. A true refusenik operates within not without his people... you can either stand on the sidelines and cheer on the humiliation heaped at your people ... or you can join in a struggle to revitalize the spirit which would put an end to any future humiliation of the kind.``

very well said. hamidm needs to have a more constructive and contextual outlook.

So was St Paul a contemperory of Jesus or wrote 3 hundred years later? was he one of the Aposotles as well? ...confused.

interesting read but not a objective analysis. author is not detailing all the facts and taking a pro-jewish stance. let me point out few things in the article that are questionable:

author contends that in 1948 UN resolution called for creation of Israel and the arabs should have accepted that. what is missing is that under the British rule of Palestine, there was a gradual illegal immigraion of arms and people by Jews into palestine. Upon withdrawal of British from Palestine, David Ben Gurion declared the Jewish state. Following the declaration, arab nations attacked palestine to stop the creation of a jewish state. Egyptians armoured vehicles were in the vicinity of Jerusalem when USA interfered and halted Egyptians offense. Then UN came into play and implicitly accepted the occupation and partition of Palestine. Regarding Jerusalem, Jordan got East Jerusalem and Israel got west Jerusalem. The point is that Israel did not just came into being by a UN resolution, it was fought by jews to take over another country and they were successful in doing so with the help of western powers. (read ``O Jerusalem`` by Larry Collins, Dominique Lapierre to validate these facts)

Author suggests that Islam and Christianity are a reformed version of Judaism. Now that is a over simplified statement that is largely a opinion of the author. There are distinct, major differences in the three faiths and I would conted that core beliefs of the three faiths are different; trinity in christainity, zakat in islam, acceptance of all prophets in islam, rejection of all prophets by jews.

Author contends ``Since the 14th century, the Muslim societies have been in a steady decline by virtue of their regressive and non-progressive nature;``. I am totally unclear as to how author came up with 14th century date. By 1707 Aurangzeb had set up the largest mughal empire in India. Turkish empire reached its zenith in mid 16th century during the time of Suleiman.

The question that Jewish people must ask themselves and the author should also think about is ``WHY have been jewish people persecuted since the time of inception of Judaism?`` To blame it all on the other party would be narrow-minded and simplistic.

When Herzl theorized a jewish state, he envisioned a state that is at peace with its neighbours (read The Jeiwsh State by Theodor Herzl). Have the jews followed that vision?

Vertex

[Well, the fact that the Jewish tribes sided with those intent on the genocide of the Muslims also tells us that not all was hunky-dory, nor were the Jews always a benevolent or ``peaceful`` presence, or that they themselves didn`t inflict ``rough times`` on other people]

Well, the fact that the Muslims actually carried out the genocide of those Jewish tribes, not the other way round, tells us who was really hunky and who was really dory ;-)

And so a template was set that has lasted to the modern day.

ylh,

..... ok .... the only thing i can do is educate my kids and see if between the two of them they can come up with a nobel prize ............ but seriously speaking, this past glory thing about the golden age of islam and all that crap is just that - crap !.......... rhazes, averroes, avicenna, etc were great scholars inspite of being muslims, not because of islam ......... there were great persian, arab, greek, chinese and hindoo scholars before gabriel defied the laws of physics to travel from a galaxy far far away ................. muslims talking about past glories and trying to draw inspiration from them is about as useful as the american indians talking about their ancestors and then doing a rain dance to take a shower !

............ i agree with you that the particular site is sort of distasteful in that it makes fun of abdul and his pet camel, but the fact of the matter remains that a few million jews have contributed more to science and culture than the billion muslims who uselessly inhabit this planet .............. and the way things are going, we are in for at least another three to four hundred years of ignorance ..............sad, but true

re:#23

Mantolives writes...

First of all the Christian Bible is both the old testament and the new testament .... >the ``Torah`` only forms a small part of the Old testament... Old testament contains several >other books that precede and follow Moses and Torah... to name a few... Psalms of >David, Book of Genesis, Book Macabees, Book Job etc...

According to Jewish theologians the Torah ( the Law) refers to the 5 books of Moses

1. genesis
2. Exodus
3. LEviticus
4. Numbers
5. Deutronimy

---

But the `` written Torah`` - ie the book found in synogues consists both the of Torah ( the 5 book of moses) + Nevi`m ( the story of the prohets - Joshua, Judges Samuel etc etc) + Kethuvim ( Pslams+ proverbs+ Job etc etc) the last being writings of the Jewish politicans ie Saul, David, Solomon etc etc ( The Jews dont consider them as prophets buts as kings)

So the ``written Torah`` = ``old testament`` of the bible is a correct assesment...... Consequently the Torah i