Desicritics Comments on Israel and the Jews - Causes of Hatred, Or The Absence of Cause?

Comment by null

Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:16:54 EST

bd #104 when is the next one coming?

Comment by bd

Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:38:26 EST

Chandra 100 I have no problem questionning the great and good of this world, including Amartya Sen. His brilliance notwithstanding, his book on identity has some holes which I have explored in other places. Now for Mr. Murty. Well, I am not sure what exactly he is asking for. Perhaps he would prefer the world to turn into an idealised trading system where there are no boundaries, perfect movement of ideas, capital and labour etc. Unfortunately for him, there are issues such as genocide (1971) and invasion (kargil). I am not really very sure what to make of his comment. If he thinks war is bad for business, then it's a "d'oh" statement. If he thinks we shouldn't have gone into BD in 1971 or fought the Kargil war, then it's a very na�ve statement. The point is that the first was a war of choice and the second was a war of necessity. But both were forced upon us, and in the latter case, we managed the war successfully, and my friend, that IS the point which I was making. If you HAVE to go to war, better have an economy which can take that load. Hoping for no war and leaving borders unprotected, hmmm, I wonder if Mr. Murthy locks his doors at night :) I agree it's a relative spend question. But this theory of relativity is where the question arises. Education is very important for you. For somebody else, railways is very important. For another chap, its subsidies to cotton farmers which is more important. For XYZ, its important for India to spend money on famine striken people in Japan. But when thinking about spend, security will always have the highest call for a state, I am afraid. But you are right, this argument has run its course, wait for the next one, where I think there might be a bigger one, lol :D Cheers bd

Comment by Chandra

Fri, 16 Feb 2007 17:42:10 EST

Can't let go... The question is not whether they classify them as israeli or Jewish...incorrect!!!!! The question is "Do you consider yourself a national citizen first or a Muslim first?" It is not an either OR question..its an ordered choice question!!!!!! Additionally look at the variance in data amongst the countries that the question was asked. You are right about the US only to some extent. However recent data has estimated the proportion of people who can be classified as "very religious" to be not more than 25% of the population. Divorce: Your data is not updated An amendment to the Indian Divorce Act of 1869 approved by the lower house of India's parliament gives Christian women divorce rights equal to those of Christian men, churches say. (September 12, 2001). The difference between the personal laws of muslims as opposed to other communities is that some of them are definitely regressive. Having said that there has been a positive change over the last few years. GDP Data: Run through GDP data of pre and post war. You will see an impact. Whether we can or cannot manage is not the debate. The issue is whether there was an impact and there was, however small Could not find your Tavleen, Shekhar Gupta article, can you send me the links? Thanks rgds

Comment by Anamika

Fri, 16 Feb 2007 04:01:02 EST

Chandra: "I dont think you can equate Pews with Tebbit. One was a loyalty question, the other is a ordered choice question. Loyalty question is an either/or, Ordered choice implies levels of liking." The premise remains the same. Such "choice" surveys are very rare amongst Western citizenry - except of course of the "ethnic minorities." So no one carries out a survey on whether Israelis would classify themselves as: 1. Israeli OR 2. Jewish or in case of USA: 1. Christian 2. American There are surveys that measure "religous" affiliations in the US - which shows it to be the most "Christian" and religious of all Western countries. But that is not framed in binary, either/or, identity terms as is the case with the survey you quoted. I agree that it is a ridiculous idea to allow religious rules to apply to civil laws. But why just stick to Islam. The lack of a uniform civil code means Catholic Indians do not have the right to divorce, even when they do in most Catholic countries? Fodder scam = literacy figures were dealt with widely in the mid-1990s by the press including major articles by Tavleen Singh, Shekhar Gupta and Vinod Mehta. The total sum for the scam was the figure used by WB and various Indian bodies as the "ideal" budget to achieve literacy. BD: Agree with you on this one. Pre-Kargil data also ignores the sanctions that went into effect in 1998. While those signalled a dip, it also showed India's ability to "manage" those sanctions and limit their effect. Secondly, the number of MPLBs that are there in India is not the issue. Not that I would agree with you anyways. The issues is Muslims have a different set of personal laws than Hindus and thats quite something Fodder scam = 100% literacy?? Whats your source?

Comment by Chandra

Fri, 16 Feb 2007 02:59:45 EST

BD 99 I would agree that isolating factors is difficult if not completely impossible. Also as I mentioned before it cannot be a single reason. One big reason for drop in the economy during the parliament attack was lower Agri produce. But to say it is not a reason at all is kind of an understatement. Spurt in investments alone cannot overcome multiple years of losses owing to war or tensions. Your own estimate of the impacts of boycotts on the Israel war is between 5-10%, surely war would have some impact wouldn't it? Military spend. No argument or grudge. Agree it is not either or. What you need to see is relative spend on education. I dont know about you, but i see great value in providing education to all (Improving quality et al). With more than 350 mill below poverty that is indeed a great need. Anamika 97, I dont think you can equate Pews with Tebbit. One was a loyalty question, the other is a ordered choice question. Loyalty question is an either/or, Ordered choice implies levels of liking. Secondly, the number of MPLBs that are there in India is not the issue. Not that I would agree with you anyways. The issues is Muslims have a different set of personal laws than Hindus and thats quite something Fodder scam = 100% literacy?? Whats your source? My last post on this topic!!!!!!

Comment by Chandra

Fri, 16 Feb 2007 02:39:56 EST

bd 98 PIB data is related to AMJ 99, before Kargil war. I have all the GDP numbers and hence I speak I have also included a quote from Narayanmurthy. I know when you can question somebody like Amartya sen, NM must be a walk in the park :-)

Comment by bd

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:54:22 EST

I should also clarify that it is extremely difficult to isolate factors such as war on GDP growth rate and other factors. Risk does go up and you will see issues with dropping indices. But the question is, is the economy able to handle war? As you would see from the Indian data, yes, it can and has successfully managed the war. It was on its way up before, it successfully navigated the interregnum and after that, it was good :) Secondly, investment decisions are not binary. You will not take the 1� invested in the military and give it over to a hospital. That is very shoddy thinking and I strongly suggest that that line of thinking shouldn't be carried out. Otherwise, one will turn around and say, no investment in airports in Delhi as there are no primary health centers village xyz in bastar district. Its that illogical. A state needs to invest in security. And let me remind you, a state which does not provide security will very soon lose its rationale for existence. And this binary illogical link up can be made on very many pairs. How does the investment in the golden quadrilateral sync up with investment in subsidies for cotton so as to avoid cotton farmer suicides? See what I mean? cheers bd

Comment by bd

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:42:58 EST

Chandra, #93, unfortunately, as an investment banker and secondly as my doctoral research is in this particular area, I am afraid I have to stand behind my words. As it so happens and as previous research has shown, after an attack or war, economies rebound, sometimes due to influx of public spending or in case of the markets, for contrarian purposes. But in this particular case, here's a report from that time. Your personal experience isnt the question here, the question was, what was the overall impact on the economy. http://pib.nic.in/feature/fe1099/f1310991.html also you might want to check out the world bank data here http://devdata.worldbank.org/data-query/ if you wish to have more data sources or more research article citations, you know where to find me!

Comment by Anamika

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:00:08 EST

Chandra: My concern with the Pew survey and others of its kind is that it sets up an either/or logic, despite being couched in apparently "objective" language. It has an implicit "Tebbit test" logic built in which allows opinions to be extrapolated and formed based on such survey results without really taking into the complexities of identity and loyalties that any individual may feel at any point in time. You ask: "Why else do you have a muslim personal law board in India and no uniform civil code?" On principle I favour a uniform civil code but for the record we don't have "a" Muslim Personal law board but various ones - there was initially a single board which was supposed to provide civil law guidance for the "Muslim" community. It became increasingly Deoband Sunni dominated through the 1990s and resulted in alienating most "other" Muslims. So there are now different boards for the Bahais, and Shias (and various others). The Shia Personal Law board for example refuses the logic of the triple talaq and has recently issued a "model" nikahnama which is more "modern" (and better for women, or at least that is the avowed intent) than the Deoband-backed nikahnamas. Oh btw, it doesn't just stop there. There is also an All India Muslim Women's Personal Law Board that does not accept the dictats of the AIMPL. :-) Just for that we need a uniform civil code! Btw, I dont think war is good for business (except if you are American-style military firm) but I do take a far more measured stand than you do: we live in a messy neighbourhood, and a messier world, so to grudge defence spending is a bit naive. I agree we don't spend nearly enough on infrastructure or education but its not a zero sum or indeed an either/or game. Just for the record, in a "poor country" (as you put it) a single "scam" (the famous chaara-ghotala with the "secular" messiah Laloo Prasad Yadav) was equal to the amount needed for achieving 100% literacy in the country. Will be happy to continue discussing this topic I feel we are going off topic for this thread. So a bit unfair for others.. Best,

Comment by Chandra

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 07:31:10 EST

Anamika... On the Pew survey, the options are simple....given a choice what are you first? a. Muslim b. Pakistani Most chose Muslim. In a recent survey in India, something that I saw on TV, people were asked what are your first? India/Tamilian or Hindu. People started with Indian, next Tamilian and last Hindu. I have not understood your concern about what a muslim is? Muslim I understood was a person practicing the religion. Are there other definitions? Why else do you have a muslim personal law board in India and no uniform civil code? On the India-Pak economy part, Look at the data (GDP/ FDI, Inflation, SENSEX) and draw your own conclusions. Secondly, this is not my opinion alone. If you were to google for comments made by businesses and other service providers during that time, you would notice an overall negative feeling during that period attributable to the hostile situation. Having said that, let me reiterate, I am not arguing that peace alone is responsible for the downturn during the war years. But it is factor and many of us have personally experienced it. For a poor country like ours it is very important that we avoid conflict as much as possible. Did you know we spent about 30 B dollars on defence last year and only 4 B on primary education? "The last time India went to war was with Pakistan in 1971, when India was a closed economy," said N. R. Narayana Murthy, chairman of Infosys Technologies, India's largest publicly traded software exporter. "Today we are a globalized economy, and prolonged talk of war is not going to help business at all." rgds

Comment by Anamika

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:11:23 EST

Ruvy: "Urdu - which does have plenty of Arabic terms to cover the religious concepts of Islam, among other things - they would understand an Arabic term like "'umma"." Persian has an "Arabic" script AND people who speak the language are also Muslim, hence..... Logic begins to weaken there. "Umma" is a word that MAY be understood in the sub-continent although how it is understood would be quite different. India's Islamic heritage means we have elements of Persian and Arabic that SEEM similar in some of our languages (especially in Hindustani) but do they mean the same thing? Probably not! A good example would be the very strict example of "fitna" which has extremely severe Islamic moral and theological meaning and significance. In India, "fitna" is understood mostly in context of a song that was popular nightclubs a couple of years ago titled - "fitna dil." So you are assuming too much and once again that is based in an essentialist thinking. "b) My source is the unending propaganda of the "Palestinian" Authority that a suicide bomber will go to heaven as though he had died in a jihad, and get 72 eternal virgins as his reward. What source the PA and Arab terror groups use is question you might wish to address to them." I have seen the Fatah, IJ and Hamas propaganda, not to mention stuff from Hizbollah. While they talk of a "martyr" going to heaven, there is NO mention of ANY virgins they will receive. So far that is WESTERN/ZIONIST propaganda with NO Islamic basis. Btw, if you REALLY care to know - a "martyr" not only goes to heaven but can also secure passage to heaven for a number of his loved ones in heaven (72 is generally the number). In a sense, they can achieve something - eternal happiness for their families - that would be materially impossible in their lifetimes. And that is a greater motivator than Western orientalising, and demeaning canard of "72 virgins." "c) The concept of Pan-Arabism was a philosophy advocating the unity of the Arab people. While it was not necessarily religious or tied to Islam, the concept of the "'umma" was the unity of Moslem nation - which was initially Arab." Which means WHAT? Circular logic there with little weight. Or let me use an equally ridiculous line of reasoning: So if the West came up with modern "democracy" and West was "initially" pagan, democracy is a pagan concept? d) The Arabs who are influenced by the Wahhabi movement either go to madrassas funded by the Saudis, or get their education from madrassas funded from the Moslem Brotherhood. Moslem Brotherhood and Wahhabism are not the same, remember? I am not doubting that Wahhabi madrassas exist or that they are radicalized. But cant you differentiate between Saudi Wahhabism and the Moslem Brotherhood? Its like saying Deobandi and Wahhabism is the same! Again Ruvy - STOP ESSENTIALISING!

Comment by Anamika

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 05:54:26 EST

T: you can be caliph any time, but only if you promise to wear an outsized poorly tie turban with some tacky plastic "jewel" stuck to the front of it, and fly about on a carpet. :-) Happy Valentines... Chandra - I looked at that Pew survey sometime back. And some of the material that accompanied the responses and something that plain statistics don't answer is: what did those people mean when they said "Muslim." A closer look shows that the word meant completely different things to different people. Btw, I don't agree with your point about Indo/Pak economy and link to "peace." But I think that is a different discussion altogether. :-)

Comment by Chandra

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 03:53:12 EST

Hi All Here is a Pews survey on the Ummah question A Pew Global Attitudes survey published in 2005 asked, "Do you consider yourself a national citizen first or a Muslim first?" These were the answers from Muslim respondents in six countries: Pakistan : national citizen 7 percent; Muslim 79 percent. Morocco : national citizen 7 percent; Muslim 70 percent. Jordan : national citizen 23 percent; Muslim 63 percent. Turkey : national citizen 29 percent; Muslim 43 percent. Indonesia : national citizen 35 percent; Muslim 39 percent. Lebanon : national citizen 30 percent; Muslim 30 percent.[6] I hope that resolves some of the debate BD mate If you had done a little bit of analysis on India/Pak GDP data you would not have commented on India/Pak economies before/after Parliament attack/Kargil (Change in GDP growth is about 2-3 percentage points). Agreed, peace alone is not responsible but it is a big plus. Ask me because I know how much foreign business I lost at that time. In the future kindly look at data before commenting. If indeed Paranoia keeps you alive, how come one needs treatment for it? Surely you donot need treatment for something that keeps you alive!!!!! regards cheers

Comment by bd

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 02:34:39 EST

t, i wrote out a long comment and then hit publish and it vanished! bugger! ok, here's another try, bit short as I have to off and pummel a mannequin into submission during my first aid class. there are other places and people who believe in this concept, such as the media (all kinds, left and right, muslim and arab and jewish and indian and american and you have you) the political organisations ranging from the muslim council of UK to the OIC to the UN GA (yep, voting takes place according to the muslim bloc, go figure or rather ask any UN ambassador / staffer), etc. etc. Its not only for courtyard consumption, until and unless you think the world is a village :), it is pretty much out there, mate. Otherwise you wouldnt find a significant proportion of say British muslims actually supporting or being out there in somalia to kashmir, chechnya to iraq. Now I do agree that there are other identities. I also dont think that its primary. But this identity does exist. You might not buy it, mate, but there are far too many people who are not only buying it, but are also part of it and want to extend it. You ask where? ask the tablighi jaamaat people what is their primary identity? and what is their aim? nothing bad, its good, but there you go :), they arent courtyard consumption folks, they arent think tanks and they arent cabals, mate, they are ordinary people like you and me, wanting to establish good religious practices across all muslims, irrespective of any other group factor. If that's not another ummah group identifier then I dont know what is. But there you go :) cheers bd and I hope this gets published!!

Comment by temporal

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:57:53 EST

beady: glad you enjoyed your dinner...ours is a few hours away this particular ummah concept exists in three places 1: in the jaahil mullah's mosque (for courtyard consumption only) 2: in the think-tank scholar's imagination and profusion of papers (we have discussed the causes of this at length -- end of cold war - the adversarial manner of doing business and politics in the US -- the need to replace ruskies in a hurry etc. etc.) 3: picked up and played to the hilt by neoconzix cabal to spread democracy (insert winking icon of your choice here) the ground reality is these disenfranchised folks have multiple identities of which being muslim is only one...and if anyone makes the fallacy of picking only that one and tries to sell me the ummah fruit cake i ain't buyin' ;) ______ ruvy # 84: exercise your brain for a few days think i have dropped plenty of hints already :) salam

Comment by bd

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:36:55 EST

T #66 Just came back from a lovely valentine's day dinner with my two girls, I finally managed to bribe my little girl into agreeing to be my valentine, and the whole restaurant applauded! :) But, mate, for the point about the ummah and self identification, I think its in the eye of the beholder. Based upon my arguments and what I have seen, I can see that group being formed, acting on its own dynamics and working. If you think that its because of other groups and its because of whipping, that may well be the case, but the group exists :). I agree that its easy to whip the disenfranchised, mate. Story of humankind. Look at the jews, 2000 years and still going on! :) Chandra #80, whoa whoa, what makes you think that there is a link between the fight with pakistan and our economy? Our economy was booming when kargil was planned, going on, after the JK state parliament attack and the main parliament attack. Lets not confuse things here. And existential issues rarely are addressed or removed by appeals to economic self being. As long as Kashmir is looked on as the atut ang of India and Pakistan, the respective economies can go hang. And paranoia is very good when your mere existence is in question. If you don't think so, then you might want to consider the hundreds and thousands of nations and countries which have vanished in the mists of human history. Think about the hundreds of american indian first nation nation's. They had peace treaties, where are the nation's? and if you are going to point at the reservations. Think about the assyrians. Or or or. Paranoia keeps one alive, mate :)

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:36:17 EST

Let's start with your comment #86 - relatively easy to answer. a) India is not an Arabic speaking country, but to my recollection, lots of Pakistanis and other Moslems read and write on this site - and speaking Urdu - which does have plenty of Arabic terms to cover the religious concepts of Islam, among other things - they would understand an Arabic term like "'umma". b) My source is the unending propaganda of the "Palestinian" Authority that a suicide bomber will go to heaven as though he had died in a jihad, and get 72 eternal virgins as his reward. What source the PA and Arab terror groups use is question you might wish to address to them. c) The concept of Pan-Arabism was a philosophy advocating the unity of the Arab people. While it was not necessarily religious or tied to Islam, the concept of the "'umma" was the unity of Moslem nation - which was initially Arab. d) The Arabs who are influenced by the Wahhabi movement either go to madrassas funded by the Saudis, or get their education from madrassas funded from the Moslem Brotherhood.

Comment by temporal

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:21:55 EST

for ana's eyes only: can i volunteer to be that caliph? or will i have to settle for being the 'messiah' as our jersualemwalla has hinted? in any case - have a happy valentine day - we're snowed in! :) and :(

Comment by Anamika

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:02:19 EST

Ruvy - not only does your "dream of peace" contradict your own earlier posts with visions of ethnic cleansing and genocide, it seems to regurgitate the standard far-right settler rhetoric from Israel that couches unilateral action as "peace proposals." So lets see: "a) a deal worked out between Moslem and Jewish religious leaders, using the Weitzman - Feisal agreement in 1919 as a base;" A nondemocratic agreement with NO validity with the Palestinians of the time OR now. And hence of little use. "b) working out a way for every Arab family that lives in Israel to wind up minimally with the equivalent of $200,000 (according to the market rate of 1/1/2005) for investment in an Arab economy that is independent of the west, so that after one or two generations every Arab family that desires to can leave a Jewish entity with serious funds and build a new and prosperous life elsewhere (preferably in the Arab world);" Seemingly quite nice but basically a plan for PAYING families who will then "desire" to leave a state that is oppressing them. I like the fact that you are quite clear these people would not be welcome (by likes of you) in non-Arabic (hence Western countries. c) an economy where Arabs working in Israel get paid the same wages as Israelis get; WOW! That IS progressive. But how will they get those jobs when the access to schools is blocked by IOF tanks? d) removing the deleterious influence of the west and its imperial designs on the region; Given that "Western" settlers from US continue to move to the land how is this possible. Moreover, even during the WW2, Jewish immigrants from Germany refused to part with their right to a German passport (a right they took up as soon as possible after the war), how is this going to be achieved? I don't see many Western "settlers" giving up their EU or US dual citizenships for an Israeli one today either. e) removing the artificial "nation states" that Churchill drew up, removing the Wahhabi monarchy in Arabia, and establishing a federative Arab state east of the Jordan that would eventually include all of Arabia except Kurdistan; So once again the people who live in these lands dont have a say because somehow these are PREDETERMINED quantities and qualities... f) reestablishing a caliphate; WHY? Most Muslims don't think this is a very useful idea. And WHERE and WHAT will this caliphate be? g) the end of the Zionist regime and the establishment of a Kingdom of Israel ruled by a regency council until the arrival of the messiah; Didn't GOD scatter the Jews according to the Bible and doesn't this Kingdom of Israel go against EXPRESS commands of the Bible? h) Arab citizenship for the Arabs in this country with full rights to participate in the Kingdom of Israel's economic life, and full participation in the political life of a Kingdom of Arabia; And this means WHAT in REAL terms? Not in delusional messianic forms but in real political, economic, social senses? i) cooperation between the Children of Abraham in developing Israel and Arabia - meaning, for example, working together to plant and harvest crops here. Hmmmm....really. Agains SOUNDS good but what does this MEAN in real terms?

Comment by Anamika

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:51:00 EST

Ruvy: "Since more of you understand Arabic than Hebrew, I figured that the Arabic would be more illustrative in making the point." Why? India is not an Arabic speaking country. Neither was it ever an official language of the country. So why would we understand Arabic? "They want a caliphate and they want glory and all those forever virginal females in heaven..." Can you explain WHAT is the source of this particular fib? In all my readings of the Koran and the Sunnahs, I have not found a single mention of virgins in heaven! "I read enough about pan-Arabism to understand that it was the "'umma" dressed up in a suit and tie and preaching Marx and Engels..." How? Is that what you BELIEVE? Pan-Arabism as a philosophy, movement, doctrine was not Islamic but religiously inclusive. "...a lot of Arabs are very strongly influenced by the ideas of and the writings of el Wahhab." Who are these "lot of Arabs"?

Comment by Deepti Lamba

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 12:40:24 EST

Nu Temporal? What are you waiting for? The messiah? Lol, reminds me of a saying I read on the back of a car 'When our savior comes this car will be unmanned' and had me adding - hopefully not while you're still 'manning' it on the road. No more interruptions from me.

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 10:55:51 EST

"we have never gotten around to discussing my version";) Nu Temporal? What are you waiting for? The messiah? Elucidate your ideas please. Enlighten me. And as Chandra suggested, let's move on!

Comment by temporal

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 09:37:33 EST

ruvy: finally in response to in reality ummah and phoenix both don't fly -mahajirzadeh you admit: So right now, the idea of the "'umma" may fly like a phoenix, but that may change - soon. thanks for this admission:) phoenix is a mythical bird! enough said:) and again what is a 'lot' of arabs or 'some' of the arabs? the muslims number over 1.4 billion and a majority of them are non-arabs (amd non wahabis) we have never gotten around to discussing my version;) if and when we do on some occasion you will discover that my 'version' will place emphasis on rights, dignity and justice for everyone that will be in conflict with those who hear voices from their gods to repeat above as i replied to you in #69 ruvy 65: please do not insult indian intelligence! the issue is not white, brown or black the issue is justice, occupation, apartheid, ghettoisation, bantustisation salam

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 09:27:32 EST

Chandra, "Of course there is no harm in having a strong view on something, but are you listening? Are you evaluating your POV and making changes or are you there standing stubborn? Its silly really, move on!!!!" Go look at Temporal's posts to me. They get pretty repetitive. I do have a vision for peace, and the chief elements of that vision are these; a) a deal worked out between Moslem and Jewish religious leaders, using the Weitzman - Feisal agreement in 1919 as a base; b) working out a way for every Arab family that lives in Israel to wind up minimally with the equivalent of $200,000 (according to the market rate of 1/1/2005) for investment in an Arab economy that is independent of the west, so that after one or two generations every Arab family that desires to can leave a Jewish entity with serious funds and build a new and prosperous life elsewhere (preferably in the Arab world); c) an economy where Arabs working in Israel get paid the same wages as Israelis get; d) removing the deleterious influence of the west and its imperial designs on the region; e) removing the artificial "nation states" that Churchill drew up, removing the Wahhabi monarchy in Arabia, and establishing a federative Arab state east of the Jordan that would eventually include all of Arabia except Kurdistan; f) reestablishing a caliphate; g) the end of the Zionist regime and the establishment of a Kingdom of Israel ruled by a regency council until the arrival of the messiah; h) Arab citizenship for the Arabs in this country with full rights to participate in the Kingdom of Israel's economic life, and full participation in the political life of a Kingdom of Arabia; i) cooperation between the Children of Abraham in developing Israel and Arabia - meaning, for example, working together to plant and harvest crops here. Am I dreamer? Yes, I am. My dream is not of war but of peace. My dream is of freedom for and reconciliation between the Children of Abraham. My dream is to see every Arab refugee camp closed with their residents living in decent homes. I see a lot of the homes that could be theirs in the Arab villages along the Shechem Road to Jerusalem. And yes, I do dream of the day when there will be a Temple on the Temple Mount, and the the Children of Kedar and Nevayot will come to make sacrifices at G-d's House of Splendor. I do not have all the answers, but I do have a vision. And its a lot better than the mini-state proposed for the Arabs here in a "two state solution," a pathetic "Palestine" that would always be wracked by poverty and war. And we already see what a "secular democratic State of Palestine" would look like from the blood being shed in Gaza. That is not the kind of country I would want to live in.

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 08:50:51 EST

I seemed to have started a fight here that I didn't mean to about how groups identify themselves. Let's back up just a little bit. I introduced the term "'umma" into this conversation because it is the cognate of the Hebrew "'am," and means nation and religion both. Westerners have trouble with "'am" because it doesn't fit neatly into their religion/nationality/ethnic way of dividing the world. Since more of you understand Arabic than Hebrew, I figured that the Arabic would be more illustrative in making the point. I also used the term "'umma" because that is how my worst enemies (the ones that admit they're enemies,) the Wahhabis, describe themselves. They want a caliphate and they want glory and all those forever virginal females in heaven (what does a woman suicide bomber get in heaven, anyway?), and they want me and anybody else who is a kaffir (including how many hundreds of millions of Hindus and Buddhists?) to die or convert to Islam. And frankly, I read enough about pan-Arabism to understand that it was the "'umma" dressed up in a suit and tie and preaching Marx and Engels either instead of, or along with the suras of the Qur'an. Temporal, I realize that you may not identify with the "'umma," (and I also see that you like the Wahhabis as much as I do), but apparently a lot of Arabs do. And a lot of Arabs are very strongly influenced by the ideas of and the writings of el Wahhab. So right now, the idea of the "'umma" may fly like a phoenix, but that may change - soon. The Saudis have been working on that for the last eight decades now. They went into Iraq with Wahhabi irregulars and stirred up a nice civil war between the Sunnis and the Shia. Hamas, now at war with the PLO, is just a branch office of the Egyptian Moslem Brotherhood, which is a Wahhabi puppet, and in the Jerusalem Post, some idiot has proposed putting Judea and Samaria under a Saudi protectorate! Is this the version of Islam you want to see expanding world wide? Is this the version of Islam you want to see if/when a green flag goes up over the Toronto City Hall? Something for you to chew on, my North American friend.