*Time Is: Going Economically Viral On Islam*

[Contumacious]

1925? Zionist settlement between 1880 and 1948 did not displace or dispossess Palestinians.

An Introduction to the Israel-Palestine Conflict

by Norman G. Finkelstein

what spurred Palestinians' opposition to Zionism was not anti-Semitism in the sense of an irrational hatred of Jews but rather the prospect - very real - of their expulsion. "The fear of territorial displacement and dispossession,"

.

 

[mdn2000]

1925? Zionist settlement between 1880 and 1948 did not displace or dispossess Palestinians.

An Introduction to the Israel-Palestine Conflict

by Norman G. Finkelstein

what spurred Palestinians' opposition to Zionism was not anti-Semitism in the sense of an irrational hatred of Jews but rather the prospect - very real - of their expulsion. "The fear of territorial displacement and dispossession,"



.

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=8&x_nameinnews=169&x_article=985

Norman Finkelstein's Fraudulent Scholarship

Campus anti-Israel activists copy many of their arguments from two main sources – MIT professor Noam Chomsky, and his acolyte Norman Finkelstein, a DePaul University political science professor who never misses an opportunity to inform readers that his parents were Holocaust survivors.

Anti-Zionists and anti-Semites often reference Finkelstein's books despite the fact that they are marred by factual inaccuracies, omissions and selective mention of fact

Finkelstein is once again sloppy in his research. A full 10 years before the Six Day War, Podhoretz wrote a well-known article for the Zionist magazine Midstream about the importance of American Jews making the case for Israel. He wrote:

Failing active restraint by America, the Arabs will continue to provoke, and Israel, under the inalienable right of self-preservation, will be forced to move. It is in the interest of the United States to insure that justice is to be done to Israel, and American Jews, who should be alerted by their interest as Jews to the special danger of the situation in the Middle East. . . are the ones to make that point clear to their fellow Americans.

Flawed Book

Just as inaccurate as the Holocaust Industry is Finkelstein's book Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict. Dedicated to the proposition that Israel and Zionism are illegitimate, the book relies largely on anti-Israeli secondary sources and virtually ignores contrary evidence.

For example, Finkelstein's chapter "Born of War, Not by Design," about the 1948 Palestinian refugees, relies almost exclusively on Benny Morris's book The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, which has been seriously challenged by mainstream historians for selectively using Israeli archival material. Finkelstein relies on information found in The Birth, but often distorts already questionable material. For example, Morris claims in one of his endnotes that Ben-Gurion said:

[a return] is out of the question until we sit together beside a [peace conference] table...and they will respect us to the degree that we respect them and I doubt whether they deserve respect as we do. Because, nonetheless, we did not flee en masse. [And] so far no Arab Einstein has arisen and [they] have not created what we have built in this country and [they] have not fought as we are fighting...We are dealing with a collective murderer.

Rather than checking the original source, Finkelstein distorts the secondary source. In order to demonstrate Ben-Gurion's "extreme" "racis[ism]," he shortens Morris's citation to read, "Arabs were not entitled to the same respect accorded to Jews because 'so far no Arab Einstein has arisen...We are dealing with a collective murderer.' "

Benny Morris himself has long been critical of Finkelstein's scholarly research as it relates to his [Morris's] work. He criticizes Finkelstein for "selectively quot[ing]" from his book and for not knowing "anything ...beyond what is found" in his books. His sources, according to Morris, are "dubious," and he adds that Finkelstein fails to marshal "sources or materials from elsewhere that could serve to contradict my findings" (Journal of Palestine Studies, Autumn 1991). According to Morris, "for Finkelstein the only good Israeli is an evil Israeli."

Chomsky and Finkelstein, a poor choice to link.

 

[BlindBoo]

1925? Zionist settlement between 1880 and 1948 did not displace or dispossess Palestinians.

An Introduction to the Israel-Palestine Conflict

by Norman G. Finkelstein

what spurred Palestinians' opposition to Zionism was not anti-Semitism in the sense of an irrational hatred of Jews but rather the prospect - very real - of their expulsion. "The fear of territorial displacement and dispossession,"

.

From your link. "Come 1948, the Zionist movement exploited the "revolutionary times" of the first Arab-Israeli war - much like the Serbs did in Kosovo during the NATO attack - to expel more than 80 percent of the indigenous population (750,000 Palestinians), and thereby achieve its goal of an overwhelmingly Jewish state,"

You could just as well say the the Arabs, by choosing a military option in Nov. 1947, played into the Zionist hands and their plans to exploit the situation.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

The US just has to keep supporting iron fisted monarchy's such as the one in Saudi Arabia, it's an acceptable cost if you consider that without them we would have a dis-stabilized middle east run by Islamic theocrats that care less about their people than the current monarch's do. At the same time the US could support democracy movements in the middle east, and try to get the leadership of the middle east monarchy's to move towards constitutional monarchy and democracy. That is if you want to take a national interest stance.

Personally I think we should just accept that the middle east will be hostile to our presence there forever, by all means sell weapons and trade with them but I don't see why we should risk US soldiers for foreign nations that hate us, especially when we could easily supply them with what they need to keep the Islamic radicals under control.

I dont think it matters what form of government islamic states have , as long as Islam is the belief of the people they are going to be hostile to the non islamic world.
Right now they point to Israel , If that were not the issue it would be detroit or tampa or nashville .

 

[Sunni Man]

Right now they point to Israel , If that were not the issue it would be detroit or tampa or nashville .

That's just plain silly

 

[mdn2000]

Right now they point to Israel , If that were not the issue it would be detroit or tampa or nashville .

That's just plain silly

So silly in fact, for that would mean the call to Islam is heard in Dearborn Michigan, home of Ford, or Hamtramack, home of Cadillac.

A Model Muslim City (Politically): Hamtramck, Michigan : The Muslim Observer

Dearborn, Michigan is often known as the Muslim capital of the United States. Just beyond the former home to Henry Ford who led the automobile industry, there’s a growing population of Muslims who have set an example in community and political involvement.
Hamtramck, Michigan is a small 2.1 sq. mile city nestled between Detroit and Highland Park, cities which have both gone through economic hurdles long before the national economic downfall.
Once a thriving Polish town, housing nearly three times as many people in the early 1920s, it has now become an international town with 20,512 people of Bosnian, Arabic, Bangladeshi, Polish, and other origins

The Call to Prayer, Adhan
Issued by Al-Islah Islamic Center through Councilmember Shahab Ahmed, the Call to Prayer, or adhan, became a major reason to divide the city just six years ago.
In a nutshell, the Call to prayer amended the noise ordinance in April 2004, allowing prayer calls to be made by Hamtramck mosques for prayers that fall between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., “for a duration not to exceed five minutes.”
The city council unanimously voted to pass the ordinance. The voting then went to the public. The ordinance passed by a 55 percent majority, according to the Associated Press.
Citizens of Hamtramck were torn apart.
Ahmed said the ordinance gave power to the people to vote on how the prayer calls should be made, in terms of times and noise level.
“If someone makes a complaint, it could change the noise ordinance,” he said.
Non-Muslims believed it was unconstitutional to allow mosques to broadcast their faith to citizens, who were not all Muslims.
Neighbors in Hamtramck said the Call to Prayer woke them up and they didn’t understand what was being said in Arabic.
The mosque passed out flyers that translated and explained the Call to prayer.
That wasn’t enough.
Abdul Motlib, president of Al-Islah Islamic Center said, the City Hall was full of protesters in the public hearing for the ordinance in a video about the ordinance, for the Building Islam in Detroit project.
Motlib didn’t think it was a big deal, as Muslims traditionally heard these prayer calls “for [the past] 1400 years.”