What is the difference between Palestinians and Islamic state

[Coyote]

I think until a Palestinian State is established it's impossible to answer what it will end up like. There are many Muslim states far less barbaric than the so-called IS that a Palestinian state is more likely to modeled after.

Even so, you know that beheading is a perfectly acceptable form of execution as capital punishment for the crimes for which it is allegedly warranted in the likes of Qatar, Yemen, Jordan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E., dear.

That still makes all of those "moderate" states pretty frick'n barbaric in the collective perspective of most of us Westerners.

Capital punishment is barbaric imo - regardless of the form it takes.

Yet the Qu'ran advocates it. And you are Muslim, yes?

And the Bible advocates stoning. So what? Those were the punishments given out at that time. No lethal injection I'm afraid. And no.

We're not talking about the barbarity of Judeo-Christian states: per your own instigation of this particular chain, we're talking about the barbarity of Muslim states.

Actually we're talking about a would-be Palestinian state and ISIS, not the "barbarity of Muslim states".

Barbarity is barbarity, but the point I was making is that it makes no difference if it's in the Quran or not any more than it does in the Bible (except to fundamentalists). It's hardly less barbaric than say hanging or the firing squad and is a relic of history. As far as the barbarity of Muslim states it's only on the books as a punishment in 3 countries according to the article I posted. If you're going to talk about barbarity - women's rights is a better fit than decapitation and the treatment of women and girl children in many Muslim countries and in a number of non-Muslim countries is contemptable. And even in that - the Palestinians don't come close to IS.

Nothing the Palestinians seem to want for their state come close to ISIS in extremism and I think the comparisons are designed to further demonize the Palestinian cause. It's like people making cheap comparisons to the Holocaust.

(only 3 countries actually have beheading on the books, Saudi Arabia, and 2 others in Africa)

For capital murder cases?

Egad - flying sharts?

I don't know. The death penalty is applied for a variety of offenses depending on the countries involved.

Which perfectly demonstrates the barbarity of Muslim theocracies, see.

The only crime which warrants the death penalty in Western states is murder.

I oppose the death penalty, even for murder - and a big reason is the inequality inherent in it in every aspect.

Is any theocracy not barbaric in some manner? Maybe not the Vatican...but it's so tiny.

The death penalty is applied very unevenly and barbarically in more than the Muslim world...just saying

 

[RoccoR]

ChrisL, et al,

Well, the difference is a matter of intensity (invasiveness), enforcement (the extent of interpretation), and radicalism (the weight of fundamentalist application).

Okay, thanks, but I still don't see that much difference when speaking about beliefs. They basically hold the same beliefs, correct? They both want to see Sharia laws practiced and enforced. I'm not concerned about them "hooking up" or anything, as I think ISIS has bigger fish to fry, and I don't really think that Palestine/Gaza is really on their radar at all.

(COMMENT)

At the moment, the scope and nature of the extent to which the religious component plays a part in the society of either the Palestinian or the new IS is really undetermined. We really haven't seen the end-game government of either. To that degree, the Palestinians have shown a propensity for lawlessness and Jihadism, but not a fanatical religious radicalism. Conversely, the forces and powers directing IS have demonstrated a leaning towards a governance more similar to that of the Taliban.

We simply don't have enough information yet to make a judgement.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Daniyel]

Lets move to the dry facts.
1.Both seeking a state of their own throughout violence.
2.Both excuse killing of non-Sunni Muslim.
(Both are Muslim fanatics of the same branch.)
3.Both are expected to share good political affairs based on mutual ideology.
4.Both share the same history of
a)revolting against local/co-existence rule.
b)revoke multiculturalism/pluralism/liberty-western ideology.
5.Both share the same allies in the M.E.

Feel free to disprove.

 

[Roudy]

ChrisL, et al,

Well, the difference is a matter of intensity (invasiveness), enforcement (the extent of interpretation), and radicalism (the weight of fundamentalist application).

Okay, thanks, but I still don't see that much difference when speaking about beliefs. They basically hold the same beliefs, correct? They both want to see Sharia laws practiced and enforced. I'm not concerned about them "hooking up" or anything, as I think ISIS has bigger fish to fry, and I don't really think that Palestine/Gaza is really on their radar at all.

(COMMENT)

At the moment, the scope and nature of the extent to which the religious component plays a part in the society of either the Palestinian or the new IS is really undetermined. We really haven't seen the end-game government of either. To that degree, the Palestinians have shown a propensity for lawlessness and Jihadism, but not a fanatical religious radicalism. Conversely, the forces and powers directing IS have demonstrated a leaning towards a governance more similar to that of the Taliban.

We simply don't have enough information yet to make a judgement.

Most Respectfully,
R

Question is, does the world really need to see what yet another Islamic Shariah terroristic shithole, this time a Palestinian one, looks like? Islamic light or Islamic pure. Who cares, it's all the same warped supremacist violent and intolerant ideology that needs to be wiped off the face of the planet.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

That's Hamas. And it's a long way from what could become a state and how the state will be set up. A very long way. Which is why it's kind of foolish to make comparisons with IS unless the purpose is to demonize.

What I find most interesting is the way it literally jumps off the page how you don't say there is anything wrong with such a stated aim.

Just hammering home your insidious crap that telling the truth is an act of demonization.

 

[ChrisL]

ChrisL, et al,

Well, the difference is a matter of intensity (invasiveness), enforcement (the extent of interpretation), and radicalism (the weight of fundamentalist application).

Okay, thanks, but I still don't see that much difference when speaking about beliefs. They basically hold the same beliefs, correct? They both want to see Sharia laws practiced and enforced. I'm not concerned about them "hooking up" or anything, as I think ISIS has bigger fish to fry, and I don't really think that Palestine/Gaza is really on their radar at all.

(COMMENT)

At the moment, the scope and nature of the extent to which the religious component plays a part in the society of either the Palestinian or the new IS is really undetermined. We really haven't seen the end-game government of either. To that degree, the Palestinians have shown a propensity for lawlessness and Jihadism, but not a fanatical religious radicalism. Conversely, the forces and powers directing IS have demonstrated a leaning towards a governance more similar to that of the Taliban.

We simply don't have enough information yet to make a judgement.

Most Respectfully,
R

Like the other two posters above noted, I don't really see much difference in the ideologies. Of course, the Palestinians are limited as to what they can do, thanks be to Israel. I think that, if allowed, they would be just as brutal as ISIS. It's that ideology and that culture. It's sick.

 

[ChrisL]

I think until a Palestinian State is established it's impossible to answer what it will end up like. There are many Muslim states far less barbaric than the so-called IS that a Palestinian state is more likely to modeled after.

Even so, you know that beheading is a perfectly acceptable form of execution as capital punishment for the crimes for which it is allegedly warranted in the likes of Qatar, Yemen, Jordan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E., dear.

That still makes all of those "moderate" states pretty frick'n barbaric in the collective perspective of most of us Westerners.

Capital punishment is barbaric imo - regardless of the form it takes.

Yet the Qu'ran advocates it. And you are Muslim, yes?

And the Bible advocates stoning. So what? Those were the punishments given out at that time. No lethal injection I'm afraid. And no.

We're not talking about the barbarity of Judeo-Christian states: per your own instigation of this particular chain, we're talking about the barbarity of Muslim states.

Actually we're talking about a would-be Palestinian state and ISIS, not the "barbarity of Muslim states".

Barbarity is barbarity, but the point I was making is that it makes no difference if it's in the Quran or not any more than it does in the Bible (except to fundamentalists). It's hardly less barbaric than say hanging or the firing squad and is a relic of history. As far as the barbarity of Muslim states it's only on the books as a punishment in 3 countries according to the article I posted. If you're going to talk about barbarity - women's rights is a better fit than decapitation and the treatment of women and girl children in many Muslim countries and in a number of non-Muslim countries is contemptable. And even in that - the Palestinians don't come close to IS.

Nothing the Palestinians seem to want for their state come close to ISIS in extremism and I think the comparisons are designed to further demonize the Palestinian cause. It's like people making cheap comparisons to the Holocaust.

(only 3 countries actually have beheading on the books, Saudi Arabia, and 2 others in Africa)

For capital murder cases?

Egad - flying sharts?

I don't know. The death penalty is applied for a variety of offenses depending on the countries involved.

Which perfectly demonstrates the barbarity of Muslim theocracies, see.

The only crime which warrants the death penalty in Western states is murder.

I oppose the death penalty, even for murder - and a big reason is the inequality inherent in it in every aspect.

Is any theocracy not barbaric in some manner? Maybe not the Vatican...but it's so tiny.

The death penalty is applied very unevenly and barbarically in more than the Muslim world...just saying

The Palestinians have been cited for numerous human rights violations. Honor killings are allegedly a problem there, and they say that they are mostly done in private and buried by the families in secret without reporting to any authorities. They don't have a very good record.

Human rights in the Palestinian territories - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Crimes against women accelerated during 2007. Cases of women being beaten are common in the Gaza strip. Women murdered for "family honor" are seldom reported. Most women who are murdered are buried by members of their family in secret, and their deaths are not reported to any official body. The Palestinian media also refrain from reporting on this, for the sake of "family honor."[33]

Israeli officials say Hamas in the Gaza Strip has established hard-line Islamic courts and created the Hamas Anti-Corruption Group, which is described as a kind of "morality police" operating within Hamas' organization. Hamas has denied the existence of the anti-corruption group, but it was recently report to have carried out a high-profile "honor killing" widely covered by the Palestinian media.[14]

In 2013, UNRWA canceled its annual marathon in Gaza after Hamas rulers prohibited women from participating in the race.[59]

 

[Coyote]

ChrisL, et al,

Well, the difference is a matter of intensity (invasiveness), enforcement (the extent of interpretation), and radicalism (the weight of fundamentalist application).

Okay, thanks, but I still don't see that much difference when speaking about beliefs. They basically hold the same beliefs, correct? They both want to see Sharia laws practiced and enforced. I'm not concerned about them "hooking up" or anything, as I think ISIS has bigger fish to fry, and I don't really think that Palestine/Gaza is really on their radar at all.

(COMMENT)

At the moment, the scope and nature of the extent to which the religious component plays a part in the society of either the Palestinian or the new IS is really undetermined. We really haven't seen the end-game government of either. To that degree, the Palestinians have shown a propensity for lawlessness and Jihadism, but not a fanatical religious radicalism. Conversely, the forces and powers directing IS have demonstrated a leaning towards a governance more similar to that of the Taliban.

We simply don't have enough information yet to make a judgement.

Most Respectfully,
R

Thank you Rocco...that is my feeling as well. There is a big difference between rhetoric and behavior in the establishment of a state, the goals of those establishing the state and behavior once one has a state and thus come under the censure of the international community. I think it's easier to guess what IS will be like because their behavior on the ground and in the areas they control (including genocide) and their current governance in the towns they control provide a good bit of information on IS. The Palestinians comprise a broader spectrum of religious viewpoints and ideas on governance. IS' goals seem to be to impose a religious state across the MidEast. The Palestinians goals seem to be to gain a geographically defined (not necessarily religiously defined) state whether through the one-state or two-state models. The difference between two groups that is extreme and the attempts to equate them is either ignorance or a deliberate attempt to further demonize the Palestinian cause.

 

[Coyote]

That's Hamas. And it's a long way from what could become a state and how the state will be set up. A very long way. Which is why it's kind of foolish to make comparisons with IS unless the purpose is to demonize.

What I find most interesting is the way it literally jumps off the page how you don't say there is anything wrong with such a stated aim.

Just hammering home your insidious crap that telling the truth is an act of demonization.

1. I don't have to "denounce" or say anything just to please you. My views on Hamas have been stated enough times on these boards that I feel no need to provide a disclaimer with every post.

2. What you call "truth" is crap. Just like the crap of people who try to equate Zionism with Nazism. If you are that ignorant of what ISIS/ISIL/IS is doing that you must compare that with a phrase from a Hamas charter, then I suggest you read more news from reputable sources.

 

[Coyote]

ChrisL, et al,

Well, the difference is a matter of intensity (invasiveness), enforcement (the extent of interpretation), and radicalism (the weight of fundamentalist application).

Okay, thanks, but I still don't see that much difference when speaking about beliefs. They basically hold the same beliefs, correct? They both want to see Sharia laws practiced and enforced. I'm not concerned about them "hooking up" or anything, as I think ISIS has bigger fish to fry, and I don't really think that Palestine/Gaza is really on their radar at all.

(COMMENT)

At the moment, the scope and nature of the extent to which the religious component plays a part in the society of either the Palestinian or the new IS is really undetermined. We really haven't seen the end-game government of either. To that degree, the Palestinians have shown a propensity for lawlessness and Jihadism, but not a fanatical religious radicalism. Conversely, the forces and powers directing IS have demonstrated a leaning towards a governance more similar to that of the Taliban.

We simply don't have enough information yet to make a judgement.

Most Respectfully,
R

Question is, does the world really need to see what yet another Islamic Shariah terroristic shithole, this time a Palestinian one, looks like? Islamic light or Islamic pure. Who cares, it's all the same warped supremacist violent and intolerant ideology that needs to be wiped off the face of the planet.

No...but what would you propose instead? What do the people themselves want? And, do they have the right to decide what form of governance they want?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

1. I don't have to "denounce" or say anything just to please you. My views on Hamas have been stated enough times on these boards that I feel no need to provide a disclaimer with every post.

2. What you call "truth" is crap. Just like the crap of people who try to equate Zionism with Nazism. If you are that ignorant of what ISIS/ISIL/IS is doing that you must compare that with a phrase from a Hamas charter, then I suggest you read more news from reputable sources.

Have you ever considering introducing one side of your mouth to the other because you sure have mastered the art of talking out of both sides.

You keep making claims as to what you have said even as you make it obvious such claims could not possibly be sincere.

When the Pallys elected Hamas to lead them, to hold them responsible for such is not an act of demonization, it is merely pointing out the truth.

If a political party were to arise in this country promising genocide against any ethnicity and the people of, say, South Carolina were to elect them, would you be bloviating as relentlessly and dishonestly as you do to defend them? Would it be "demonizing" the South Carolinians to criticize them for electing the genocidal?

 

[Coyote]

Lets move to the dry facts.
1.Both seeking a state of their own throughout violence.

Ok...has any state come about without violence?
The American Revolution
The partition of India
South Africa's freedom from apartheid
The French Revolution
North and South Sudan
Israel
The Congo
The break up of the Soviet Union and the Balkan States

Do these "dry facts" prove that the US, South Africa, Israel, etc etc are thus similar to ISIS?

2.Both excuse killing of non-Sunni Muslim.
(Both are Muslim fanatics of the same branch.)

Pretty iffy "logic". Both are Muslims of the same branch that is true. ISIS are clearly religious fanatics. Palestinians are Muslim and religious but far less "fanatical". The fight is less religious one than a nationalistic one. Second..."both excuse killing of non-Sunni's". Hmmm. Sheikh Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, the mufti of Jerusalem and All Palestine was one of the signatories of a letter denouncing in entirety, the actions and ideology of ISIS.

Muslim Scholars Release Open Letter To Islamic State Meticulously Blasting Its Ideology
Awad said its aim is to offer a comprehensive Islamic refutation, “point-by-point,” to the philosophy of the Islamic State and the violence it has perpetrated. The letter’s authors include well-known religious and scholarly figures in the Muslim world, including Sheikh Shawqi Allam, the grand mufti of Egypt, and Sheikh Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, the mufti of Jerusalem and All Palestine.

A translated 24-point summary of the letter includes the following: “It is forbidden in Islam to torture”; “It is forbidden in Islam to attribute evil acts to God”; and “It is forbidden in Islam to declare people non-Muslims until he (or she) openly declares disbelief.”​

Both "excuse" the killing of non-Sunni's....not sure about that. However, we do know that ISIS has committed genocide and war crimes against non-Sunni's AND Sunni's. They have committed war crimes, attempted genocide, mass starvation of religious minorities, mass rape and forceable marriages of women and girls and that is just the tip of it. When you look at that, any comparison completely falls apart.

3.Both are expected to share good political affairs based on mutual ideology.

This one, I don't understand what you mean?

4.Both share the same history of
a)revolting against local/co-existence rule.
b)revoke multiculturalism/pluralism/liberty-western ideology.

a) that same history is shared by the same nations I mentioned in #1 and many more
b) that too is shared by many other nations. Just for example - look at the threads on these boards dealing with "multiculturalism/pluralism" in Europe and in the USA - there is a lot of rejection and debate of that. As far as liberty-western ideology, again - that is shared by many nations in the ME, Africa, Russia to name a few where western ideals of basic human rights are not recognized or rejected. It's a weak point on which to hinge a comparison. It would be like comparing a nation like Britain to Nazi Germany because they hold some socialist principles in common.

5.Both share the same allies in the M.E.

So do we (the US). However, one notable point is ignored - the Palestinians are not allied with ISIS.

Feel free to disprove.

There is an agenda at play in these comparisons that is pretty obvious. Pointing that out, I might add - is not endorsing Hamas' methods though I'm sure some will jump to that conclusion, it is exposing the truth.

ISIS and Israel Allies Against a Palestinian State Global Research

Two photographs are presented side by side. One, titled ISIS, is the now-iconic image of a kneeling James Foley, guarded by a black-hooded executioner, awaiting his terrible fate. The other, titled Hamas, is a scene from Gaza, where a similarly masked killer stands over two victims, who cower in fear. A headline stating “This is the face of radical Islam” tries, like the images, to equate the two organisations.


We have heard this line repeatedly from Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who tweeted “Hamas is ISIS” after the video of Foley’s beheading aired. Last week, in a speech addressed to the family of Steven Sotloff, ISIS’s latest victim, he called Hamas and ISIS “tentacles of a violent Islamist terrorism.” Netanyahu’s depiction of Hamas and ISIS, or Islamic State, as “branches of the same poisonous tree” is a travesty of the truth.


The two have entirely different – in fact, opposed – political projects. ISIS wants to return to a supposed era of pure Islamic rule, the caliphate, when all Muslims were subject to God’s laws (sharia). Given that Muslims are now to be found in every corner of the globe, the implication is that ISIS ultimately seeks world domination.


Hamas’s goals are decidedly more modest. It was born and continues as a national liberation movement, seeking to create a Palestinian state. Its members may disagree on that state’s territorial limits but even the most ambitious expect no more than the historic borders of a Palestine that existed a few decades ago.


ISIS aims to sweep away Palestine and every other Arab state in the region. That is the key to interpreting the very different, if equally brutal, events depicted in the two images.​

 

[Coyote]

1. I don't have to "denounce" or say anything just to please you. My views on Hamas have been stated enough times on these boards that I feel no need to provide a disclaimer with every post.

2. What you call "truth" is crap. Just like the crap of people who try to equate Zionism with Nazism. If you are that ignorant of what ISIS/ISIL/IS is doing that you must compare that with a phrase from a Hamas charter, then I suggest you read more news from reputable sources.

Have you ever considering introducing one side of your mouth to the other because you sure have mastered the art of talking out of both sides.

You keep making claims as to what you have said even as you make it obvious such claims could not possibly be sincere.

When the Pallys elected Hamas to lead them, to hold them responsible for such is not an act of demonization, it is merely pointing out the truth.

If a political party were to arise in this country promising genocide against any ethnicity and the people of, say, South Carolina were to elect them, would you be bloviating as relentlessly and dishonestly as you do to defend them? Would it be "demonizing" the South Carolinians to criticize them for electing the genocidal?

I do my best to support my arguments with sources. I suggest you do the same if you can. Other than that I could care less about your personal opinions of what I've said or my motivations.

At this point, the discussion is whether or not ISIS and HAMAS are comparable - not whether Hamas is blameless. You are also comparing apples and oranges - US, which is a stable western nation with the conflict between Palestinians/Israeli's which has yet to result in a Palestinian state. And then - you try to make shoddy and ignorant comparisons to ISIS based on a single line of the HAMAS Charter (and Hamas I might add was elected by only a portion of the Palestinians for reasons that had more to do with inability of Fatah to improve things domestically and Fatah's corruption than it did with Hamas' broader ideology). The fact is - ISIS has amply demonstrated it's stated aims in genocide, rape, forced conversion etc of anyone it feels is the wrong religious brand. Hamas? Yes, you can criticize Hamas for that statement but that's not what you are doing. You are attempting to show that that statement in an old charter means Hamas is comparable to ISIS. Extremely weak.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I do my best to support my arguments with sources. I suggest you do the same if you can. Other than that I could care less about your personal opinions of what I've said or my motivations.

At this point, the discussion is whether or not ISIS and HAMAS are comparable - not whether Hamas is blameless. You are also comparing apples and oranges - US, which is a stable western nation with the conflict between Palestinians/Israeli's which has yet to result in a Palestinian state. And then - you try to make shoddy and ignorant comparisons to ISIS based on a single line of the HAMAS Charter (and Hamas I might add was elected by only a portion of the Palestinians for reasons that had more to do with inability of Fatah to improve things domestically and Fatah's corruption than it did with Hamas' broader ideology). The fact is - ISIS has amply demonstrated it's stated aims in genocide, rape, forced conversion etc of anyone it feels is the wrong religious brand. Hamas? Yes, you can criticize Hamas for that statement but that's not what you are doing. You are attempting to show that that statement in an old charter means Hamas is comparable to ISIS. Extremely weak.

I do believe the term you are looking for is "couldn't care less". That is, if you are actually wishing to convey the message that you do not care, as anybody with reasonable intelligence realizes. Of course, this could be more a matter of how best to translate your statements since you are on record as indicating you were done with a thread and then proceeded to rattle off seven more posts in short succession, so perhaps we just need to learn to take your statements as indicating the opposite of any verifiable truth.

As far as my supposed ignorance, I have been following this issue since the mid to late 1960s. How about you, eh?

 

[Coyote]

I do my best to support my arguments with sources. I suggest you do the same if you can. Other than that I could care less about your personal opinions of what I've said or my motivations.

At this point, the discussion is whether or not ISIS and HAMAS are comparable - not whether Hamas is blameless. You are also comparing apples and oranges - US, which is a stable western nation with the conflict between Palestinians/Israeli's which has yet to result in a Palestinian state. And then - you try to make shoddy and ignorant comparisons to ISIS based on a single line of the HAMAS Charter (and Hamas I might add was elected by only a portion of the Palestinians for reasons that had more to do with inability of Fatah to improve things domestically and Fatah's corruption than it did with Hamas' broader ideology). The fact is - ISIS has amply demonstrated it's stated aims in genocide, rape, forced conversion etc of anyone it feels is the wrong religious brand. Hamas? Yes, you can criticize Hamas for that statement but that's not what you are doing. You are attempting to show that that statement in an old charter means Hamas is comparable to ISIS. Extremely weak.

I do believe the term you are looking for is "couldn't care less". That is, if you are actually wishing to convey the message that you do not care, as anybody with reasonable intelligence realizes. Of course, this could be more a matter of how best to translate your statements since you are on record as indicating you were done with a thread and then proceeded to rattle off seven more posts in short succession, so perhaps we just need to learn to take your statements as indicating the opposite of any verifiable truth.

As far as my supposed ignorance, I have been following this issue since the mid to late 1960s. How about you, eh?

And this has what to do with ISIS or Hamas or comparisons?

 

[Lipush]

Hamas=ISIS=Hezbollah=Fatah

 

[Coyote]

Hamas=ISIS=Hezbollah=Fatah

That's just plain ignorant propoganda. Let me know when Fatah is engaging in mass rapes, genocide, forced marriages of girls and women, mass executions of those who don't follow their creed. Hamas is terrorist but it's no ISIS and folks who try to make that comparison are stretching the truth very very thin.

 

[Beelzebub]

Thing is JSIL is terrorist too.

Why does no one ever complain about JSIL's terrorism?

 

[Lipush]

Hamas=ISIS=Hezbollah=Fatah

That's just plain ignorant propoganda. Let me know when Fatah is engaging in mass rapes, genocide, forced marriages of girls and women, mass executions of those who don't follow their creed. Hamas is terrorist but it's no ISIS and folks who try to make that comparison are stretching the truth very very thin.

Hamas is worse than ISIS. At least those dumbasses don't use their own babies as sheilds.

 

[Beelzebub]

Just because Israeli soldiers shoot through Palestinian babies, it does not make them shields.
Not in any way.

But a clever attempt at spin. Sadly for you it only "works" for those who want you to shoot all Palestinian babies in the first place.