IsraPundit

WE'VE MOVED! IsraPundit has relocated to www.israpundit.com. Click here to go there now.
News and views on Israel, Zionism and the war on terrorism.

April 14, 2003

Who's Right?

Here's one additional reply that I got.

"I think you're right in your response to Ben Ami. It is no time to be meek and unassuming.

Every time I go to a Jewish event, we always talk of solutions, peace, and an Israeli state along side a Palestinian state (which is something I may ultimately believe in). However, we need a partner for this. In the meanwhile, Israel is constantly being slandered, while Jews are always on the defence, playing catch-up. At the same time, while being accused of insidious libels, we keep reminding everyone that Islam is a "religion of peace."

Unfortunately, Islam (aside from Sufi Islam and perhaps Ishmaeli Islam) has chosen widely chosen us as an enemy, just like the Germans chose us in WWII. We didn't choose them. That doesn't mean that we should not try and build bridges, but I agree we must jettison political correctness and start looking at the underlying causes of the problems in the Middle East.

For myself, I have found that every time I attend an events sponsored by the Palestinian groups, it is clear that tolerance and peaceful co-existence are simply not on the agenda. In fact, the only discussion I have heard about "peace" has centered around the "dismantling" the Jewish state, a suggestion which was not only seriously entertained at a recent meeting I went to, but something that was greeted with widespread applause.

Again, this is in stark contrast to every Jewish meeting I have attended. This is from a web site, Fatwa Online, from a Calgary based group that apparently is seen as moderate by the community:
"the peace between the leader of the Muslims in Palestine and the Jews does not mean that the Jews will permanently own the lands which they now possess. Rather, it only means that they would be in possession of it for a period of time until either the truce comes to an end, or until the Muslims become strong enough to force them out of the Muslim lands - in the case of an unrestricted peace. Likewise, it is obligatory, when we have the ability, to fight the Jews until they enter into Islam or give the jizyah(a tax levied on those who are permitted to live under the protection of a Muslim state) in servility.So all of this is with regards to when one is unable to fight the disbelievers ... .

However, when one does have the power to fight jihaad against them, then what is required is to call them to enter into Islaam, or be killed, or to pay the jizyah -.... In this case it is not permissible to seek peace with them, nor to abandon fighting and the jizyah. Rather, seeking peace is allowed when there is a need or necessity...."
I think we need to be realistic here. When one side is clearly saying that peace is a mere stage for the ultimate goal in liquidating the Jewish state--whether it be Arafat citing the Khudaibiya agreement or the 1974 PLO Cairo Phased plan, or the Calgary Islamic Information Society endorsing this view--we have to start addressing the real obstacle to a true peace, whether or not it is politically correct."