PDA

Bekijk Volledige Versie : "The Mossad's Pulitzer prize murder !"



Sallahddin
28-02-10, 19:20
"The Mossad's Pulitzer prize murder !" by Johara Baker !

source: mediamonitors.net, Feb 28, 2010 :

http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/71928

"...here comes the overriding philosophy that israel espouses & which the west in particular so surprisingly accepts time & again .
Becuase it is a nation founded on guilt & on the belief that most of the world is "against them" , israel so_called security considerations justify any & all abominations ,first & foremost murder .
This is the logic israel used in the killing of over 1400 palestinians in the Gaza strip and the rationale for the killing of Abu Jihad, Sheikh Yassin & Abdul Aziz Rantisi....

DNA
28-02-10, 19:54
well, jews are an endangered species we should protect at all costs even at the expense of other folks & peoples 'cause "we" , the west , must get rid of our "guilt", of the jewish problem in the west by establishing a jewish state where it doesn't belong: = "our" watchdog for western interests at the same time ..... , Argentina, Oeganda were lucky enough not to bear the jewish burden ....while , "we" should protect that endangerd species even it w'd mean they w'd drive us all to the ...abyss ! :lol: so sweet & innocent are they ! :lol:

israel should have been established on ....former nazis territory : Germany or on any other western soil !

better : on the ...Vatican :lol: territory !



that w'd have been fair enough ....

ELdorado
28-02-10, 21:27
"The Mossad's Pulitzer prize murder !" by Johara Baker !

source: mediamonitors.net, Feb 28, 2010 :

http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/71928

"...here comes the overriding philosophy that israel espouses & which the west in particular so surprisingly accepts time & again .
Becuase it is a nation founded on guilt & on the belief that most of the world is "against them" , israel so_called security considerations justify any & all abominations ,first & foremost murder .
This is the logic israel used in the killing of over 1400 palestinians in the Gaza strip and the rationale for the killing of Abu Jihad, Sheikh Yassin & Abdul Aziz Rantisi....


Those bloody jews zionists zionazis must be treated like everyoneelse indeed : they must be held accountable for their war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocides ....like the nazis did ....

only might can make them tkink a million times before attacking others :

attacking others with impunity must end now as Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hizbollah ....& other resistance groups unite & put their hands together to counter the israel imperialislm supported by THE imperialist west ...

ELdorado
28-02-10, 21:49
The mossad is a criminal maffia gang organisation that must be outlawed ...as is israel !

ELdorado
28-02-10, 22:02
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sallahddin
03-03-10, 19:51
The mossad is a criminal maffia gang organisation that must be outlawed ...as is israel !

well, when the mossad eliminates a palestinian or other resistance leader , resistance groups must do the same = retaliate = liquidate an israeli leader ....basta !

DNA
03-03-10, 20:57
The mossad is a criminal maffia gang organisation that must be outlawed ...as is israel !

well, the resistance 's counter mossad's terrorism must react, basta !

If they kill a leader , their leaders must be killed too ...basta ...

If they target a resistance freedom fighter abroad , their war criminals leaders must be targeted too ....everywhere ...

DNA
03-03-10, 22:37
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DNA
04-03-10, 20:36
well, jews are an endangered species we should protect at all costs even at the expense of other folks & peoples 'cause "we" , the west , must get rid of our "guilt", of the jewish problem in the west by establishing a jewish state where it doesn't belong: = "our" watchdog for western interests at the same time ..... , Argentina, Oeganda were lucky enough not to bear the jewish burden ....while , "we" should protect that endangerd species even it w'd mean they w'd drive us all to the ...abyss ! :lol: so sweet & innocent are they ! :lol:

israel should have been established on ....former nazis territory : Germany or on any other western soil !

better : on the ...Vatican :lol: territory !



that w'd have been fair enough ....

Slinger
05-03-10, 07:24
well, jews are an endangered species we should protect at all costs even at the expense of other folks & peoples 'cause "we" , the west , must get rid of our "guilt", of the jewish problem in the west by establishing a jewish state where it doesn't belong: = "our" watchdog for western interests at the same time ..... , Argentina, Oeganda were lucky enough not to bear the jewish burden ....while , "we" should protect that endangerd species even it w'd mean they w'd drive us all to the ...abyss ! :lol: so sweet & innocent are they ! :lol:

israel should have been established on ....former nazis territory : Germany or on any other western soil !

better : on the ...Vatican :lol: territory !
that w'd have been fair enough ....

Mekka of Medina had ook gekund, daar hebben van oudsher al Joodse stammen gewoond. In de tijd van Mohammed al, zoals je weet.

ELdorado
05-03-10, 19:53
Mekka of Medina had ook gekund, daar hebben van oudsher al Joodse stammen gewoond. In de tijd van Mohammed al, zoals je weet.

Look at the essence of my rhetorics : u don't understand nothing as usual ....


die joden hadden daar gewoond gewoon :

zo, volgens je, ieder die op een bepaald land woont mag daar een land stichten ??? :lol:

marokkanen moeten dus staatjes in Gouda, Utrecht, Amstrdam ...stichten ???

what do u think 'bout that column of israeli Uri Avnery "white lie" 'bout the founder father of zionism = Herzl & ....Argentina ???

Slinger
05-03-10, 20:09
Look at the essence of my rhetorics : u don't understand nothing as usual ....


die joden hadden daar gewoond gewoon :

Inderdaad het is voltooid verleden tijd. Ze zijn uitgeroeid door de moslims.


marokkanen moeten dus staatjes in Gouda, Utrecht, Amstrdam ...stichten ??? [/B][/B]

Weet je dan niet dat ze dat al lang gedaan hebben?

ELdorado
05-03-10, 20:26
Inderdaad het is voltooid verleden tijd. Ze zijn uitgeroeid door de moslims.



Weet je dan niet dat ze dat al lang gedaan hebben?

Try to make some sense or just spare me ur silly stupid non_sense , deal ???

I'm really fed up with this silly stupid bitchy non_sense attitude of urs :

can't u talk normally with somle sense ???

see the topic 'bout Uri 's "white lie" & Argentina "state of the jews" ...:

Durf je niet soms ???

Aït Ayt
05-03-10, 20:28
Inderdaad het is voltooid verleden tijd. Ze zijn uitgeroeid door de moslims.


voor hun misdaden kregen ze een joodse straf conform de thora..

ELdorado
05-03-10, 20:43
voor hun misdaden kregen ze een joodse straf conform de thora..


Precies : door hun misdaden , schendingnen van akkoorden , veraad, fitna ... ...noem maar op ....= ruimschoots verdiend !

see that israeli Uri Avnery 's white lie " column 'bout Herzl & Argentina as "state of jews" :lol:

Aït Ayt
05-03-10, 20:48
Precies : door hun misdaden , schendingnen van akkoorden , veraad, fitna ... ...noem maar op ....= ruimschoots verdiend !

see that israeli Uri Avnery 's white lie " column 'bout Herzl & Argentina as "state of jews" :lol:

ja hun misdaden waren teveel om op te noemen.. de straf was dan ook welverdiend..

ELdorado
05-03-10, 21:11
ja hun misdaden waren teveel om op te noemen.. de straf was dan ook welverdiend..


Precies : ruimschoots verdiend inderdaad :

ze werden alleen maar verbanen uit die regio terwijl de nazis ze heel anders hadden behandeld :

Gek dat joden die werden zo lang vervolgd door de kerk voor zo lang , deze zelfde joden die werden meestaal zo goed behandeld door moslims, doen ze dit allemaal tegen diezelfde moslims : wat een dankbaarheid , zeg !

ze worden de nieuw nazis & maken misbruik van de holocaust als emotioneel chantage middel & zwaard van Damocles voor politiek & ander down to earth doeleinden :

walgelijk, zeg !

ze zullen hun ultiem verdiend straf nog krijgen later ....trhat's for sure ...

Slinger
05-03-10, 21:26
voor hun misdaden kregen ze een joodse straf conform de thora..

Niet zij begingen misdaden, maar de moslims die hen uitroeiden.

Slinger
05-03-10, 21:28
Precies : ruimschoots verdiend inderdaad :

ze werden alleen maar verbanen uit die regio terwijl de nazis ze heel anders hadden behandeld :

Gek dat joden die werden zo lang vervolgd door de kerk voor zo lang , deze zelfde joden die werden meestaal zo goed behandeld door moslims, doen ze dit allemaal tegen diezelfde moslims : wat een dankbaarheid , zeg !

ze worden de nieuw nazis & maken misbruik van de holocaust als emotioneel chantage middel & zwaard van Damocles voor politiek & ander down to earth doeleinden :

walgelijk, zeg !

ze zullen hun ultiem verdiend straf nog krijgen later ....trhat's for sure ...

Ze werden niet verbannen, ze werden uitgeroeid. Genocide heet dat tegenwoordig. Lees je eigen islamitische geschiedschrijvers.

ELdorado
05-03-10, 21:32
Ze werden niet verbannen, ze werden uitgeroeid. Genocide heet dat tegenwoordig. Lees je eigen islamitische geschiedschrijvers.

ze werden verbannen , dummy ...

Slinger
05-03-10, 21:34
ze werden verbannen , dummy ...

Nooit van de Bani Koeraiza gehoord?

Je bent nog onwetender dan een analfabeet.

Aït Ayt
05-03-10, 21:43
Niet zij begingen misdaden, maar de moslims die hen uitroeiden.


ze vielen de moslims van achter in de rug aan terwijl ze een verbond met de moslims hadden en ze pleegden verraad door te heulen met de vijand..
omwille hiervan kregen ze een joodse straf conform de thora..
een welverdiende straf..

Slinger
05-03-10, 21:48
ze vielen de moslims van achter in de rug aan terwijl ze een verbond met de moslims hadden en ze pleegden verraad..
omwille hiervan kregen ze een joodse straf conform de thora..
een welverdiende straf..




Ja en degene die karavanen beroofde kwam overal mee weg.

Dat jij in dit soort verhalen trapt laat nog weer eens zien hoe bevooroordeeld jij bent.

Elke massamoordenaar in de wereldgeschiedenis heeft dergelijke smoezen gehanteerd.

Aït Ayt
05-03-10, 21:49
Ze werden niet verbannen, ze werden uitgeroeid. Genocide heet dat tegenwoordig. Lees je eigen islamitische geschiedschrijvers.

genocide ?
jij vindt het genocide dat zo'n 700 mannen gedood werden wegens hun verraad aan de moslims ?
mischien moet je anders nog even opzoeken wat genocide betekent..

de vorige keer wist je ook al niet wat genocide betekende..

Slinger
05-03-10, 21:53
genocide ?
jij vindt het genocide dat zo'n 700 mannen gedood werden wegens hun verraad aan de moslims ?
mischien moet je anders nog even opzoeken wat genocide betekent..

de vorige keer wist je ook al niet wat genocide betekende..

Dat is genocide, ja.

Rot op met je woordspelletjes.

Aït Ayt
05-03-10, 21:54
Ja en degene die karavanen beroofde kwam overal mee weg.

Dat jij in dit soort verhalen trapt laat nog weer eens zien hoe bevooroordeeld jij bent.

Elke massamoordenaar in de wereldgeschiedenis heeft dergelijke smoezen gehanteerd.

welke karavanen ?

jij trapt blijkbaar ook in dit soort verhalen anders zou jij je er immers niet op baseren en ernaar refereren.. zo te zien hecht je er wel waarde aan..

massamoord impliceert moord op onschuldige mensen die zich niet kunnen verdedigen.. daar was hier geen sprake van.. vrouwen en kinderen werden opzettelijk gespaard door de moslims..

Aït Ayt
05-03-10, 21:56
Dat is genocide, ja.

Rot op met je woordspelletjes.

dat is dus geen genocide..
de vrouwen en kinderen werden gespaard.. alleen de mannen kregen hun welverdiende straf voor hun verraad..
en het was een joodse straf.. blijkbaar vindt je de thora genocide..

Slinger
05-03-10, 21:58
dat is dus geen genocide..
de vrouwen en kinderen werden gespaard.. alleen de mannen kregen hun welverdiende straf voor hun verraad..
en het was een joodse straf.. blijkbaar vindt je de thora genocide..

Het was massamoord en genocide.

Trouwens waarom meld je niet dat de vrouwen en kinderen als slaven werden verkocht.

Ook al zo'n lekkere actie van jouw profeet.

Aït Ayt
05-03-10, 21:58
Je bent nog onwetender dan een analfabeet.

de meeste joden zijn wel verbannen en niet gedood..

Aït Ayt
05-03-10, 22:02
Het was massamoord en genocide.

Trouwens waarom meld je niet dat de vrouwen en kinderen als slaven werden verkocht.

Ook al zo'n lekkere actie van jouw profeet.

je weet dus ook al niet wat massamoord is..

door ze als slaven te verkopen werden ze in leven gehouden.. als ze niet als slaven verkocht werden waren ze ten dode opgeschreven..

het was geen actie vd profeet maar van een bevriende bemiddelaar vd joden die deze straf oplegde aan de joden..

Aït Ayt
05-03-10, 22:08
Precies : ruimschoots verdiend inderdaad :

ze werden alleen maar verbanen uit die regio terwijl de nazis ze heel anders hadden behandeld :

Gek dat joden die werden zo lang vervolgd door de kerk voor zo lang , deze zelfde joden die werden meestaal zo goed behandeld door moslims, doen ze dit allemaal tegen diezelfde moslims : wat een dankbaarheid , zeg !


ze worden de nieuw nazis & maken misbruik van de holocaust als emotioneel chantage middel & zwaard van Damocles voor politiek & ander down to earth doeleinden :

walgelijk, zeg !

ze zullen hun ultiem verdiend straf nog krijgen later ....trhat's for sure ...[/QUOTE]

inderdaad allaah zal de overtreders straffen.. niet alleen voor hun misdaden jegens de moslims maar ook voor hun afwijzing van het profeetschap van jezus en mohammed..

Slinger
05-03-10, 22:14
je weet dus ook al niet wat massamoord is..

door ze als slaven te verkopen werden ze in leven gehouden.. als ze niet als slaven verkocht werden waren ze ten dode opgeschreven..

het was geen actie vd profeet maar van een bevriende bemiddelaar vd joden die deze straf oplegde aan de joden..

De feiten zijn duidelijk.

In 627, the Meccans, accompanied by tribal allies among whom were Abyssinian mercenaries[28] as well as the Banu Nadir[29] - who had been very active in supporting the Meccans[30] - marched against Medina - the Muslim stronghold - and laid siege to it. It is unclear whether or not their treaty with Muhammad, obliged the Qurayza help him defend Medina or merely to remain neutral[8], according to Ramadan, they had signed an agreement of mutual assistance with Muhammad.[10] The Qurayza did not participate in the fighting - according to David Norcliffe, because they were offended by attacks against Jews in Muhammad's preaching - but lent tools to the town's defenders.[31] According to Al-Waqidi, the Banu Qurayza helped the defense effort of Medina by supplying spades, picks, and baskets for the excavation of the defensive trench the defenders of Medina had dug in preparation.[23] According to Watt, the Banu Qurayza "seem to have tried to remain neutral" in the battle[32] but later changed their attitude when a Jew from Khaybar persuaded them that Muhammad was sure to be overwhelmed[8] and though they did not commit any act overtly hostile to Muhammad, according to Watt,[1] they entered into negotiations with the invading army.[32]

Ibn Ishaq writes that during the siege, the Qurayza readmitted Huyayy ibn Akhtab, the chief of the Banu Nadir whom Muhammad had exiled and who had instigated the alliance of his tribe with the besieging Quraysh and Ghatafan tribes.[26] According to Ibn Ishaq, Akhtab persuaded the Qurayza chief Ka'b ibn Asad to help the Meccans conquer Medina. Ka'b was, according to Al-Waqidi's account, initially reluctant to break the contract and argued that Muhammad never broke any contract with them or exposed them to any shame, but decided to support the Meccans after Huyayy had promised to join the Qurayza in Medina if the besieging army would return to Mecca without having killed Muhammad.[33] Ibn Kathir and al-Waqidi report that Huyayy tore into pieces the agreement between Ka'b and Muhammad.[1][34]

Rumors of this one-sided renunciation of the pact spread and were confirmed by Muhammad's emissaries, Sa'd ibn Mua'dh and Sa'd ibn Ubadah, leading men of the Aws and Khazraj respectively. Sa'd ibn Mua'dh reportedly issued threats against the Qurayza but was restrained by his colleague.[35] As this would have allowed the besiegers to access the city and thus meant the collapse of the defenders' strategy[10], Muhammad "became anxious about their conduct and sent some of the leading Muslims to talk to them; the result was disquieting."[1] According to Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad ordered Nuaym ibn Masud, an well-respected elder of the Ghatafan who had secretly converted to Islam, to go to Muhammad's enemies and sow discord among them. Nuaym went to the Qurayza and advised them to join the hostilities against Muhammad only if the besiegers provide hostages from among their chiefs. He then hurried to the invaders and warned them that if the Qurayza asked for hostages, it is because they intended to turn them over to the Medinan defenders. When the representatives of the Quraysh and the Ghatafan came to the Qurayza, asking for support in the planned decisive battle with Muhammad, the Qurayza indeed demanded hostages. The representatives of the besiegers refused, breaking down negotiations[36][37] and resulting in the Banu Qurayza becoming extremely distrustful of the besieging army.[9] The Qurayza did not take any actions to support them until the besieging forces retreated.[23] Thus the threat of a second front against the defenders never materialised.[32]
[edit] Siege and surrender
[hide]
v • d • e
Campaigns of Muhammad

Ghazwah (battles which he took part)
Caravan Raids – Waddan – Safwan – Al Bawat – Dul Ashir – Badr – Banu Salim – Eid – Zakat – Banu Qaynuqa – Sawiq – Thi Amr – Ghatfan – Bahran – Uhud – Al-Asad – Dhatur-Riqa – Badru-Ukhra – Dumatul-Jandal – Banu Nadir – Trench – Banu Qurayza – Banu Lahyan – Banu Mustaliq – Thi Qerd – Hudaybiyyah – Khaybar – Mu'tah – Mecca – Hunayn – Autas – Ta'if – Hawazan – Tabouk

Sirya (battles which he ordered)
Nakhla –

On the day of the Meccans' withdrawal, Muhammad led his forces against the Banu Qurayza neighborhood. According to the Muslim tradition, he had been ordered to do so by the angel Gabriel. The Banu Qurayza retreated into their stronghold and endured the siege for 25 days. As their morale waned, Ka'b ibn Asad suggested three alternative ways out of their predicament: embrace Islam, kill their own children and women, then rush out for a charge to either win or die; or make a surprise attack on the Sabbath. The Banu Qurayza accepted none of these alternatives. Instead they asked to confer with Abu Lubaba, one of their allies from the Aws. According to Ibn Ishaq, Abu Lubaba felt pity for the women and children of the tribe who were crying and when asked whether the Qurayza should surrender to Muhammad, advised them to do so. However he also "made a sign with his hand toward his throat, indicating that [their fate] would be slaughter".[38][39][40][41] The next morning, the Banu Qurayza surrendered and the Muslims seized their stronghold and their stores.[8][42] The men - numbering between 400 and 900[21][38] - were bound and placed under the custody of Muhammad ibn Maslamah, who had killed Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf, while the women and children - numbering about 1,000[21] - were placed under Abdullah ibn Sallam, a former rabbi who had converted to Islam.[43][44]
[edit] Demise of the Banu Qurayza

The circumstances of the Qurayza's demise has been related by Ibn Ishaq and other Muslim historians. Since their accounts are contradictory[45], modern scholars have interpreted them differently:

According to Watt, Peters and Stillman, the Qurayza surrendered to Muhammad's judgement[8][38][39][40] - a move Watt classifies as unconditional.[8] The Aws, who wanted to honor their old alliance with the Qurayza, asked Muhammad to treat the Qurayza leniently as he had previously treated the Qaynuqa for the sake of Ibn Ubayy. (Arab custom required support of an ally, independent of the ally's conduct to a third party.) Muhammad then suggested to bring the case before an arbitrator chosen from the Aws, to which both the Aws and the Qurayza agreed to. Muhammad then appointed Sa'd ibn Mua'dh to decide the fate of the Jewish tribe.[8][38][39][40][46]

According to Hashmi, Buchanan and Moore, the tribe agreed to surrender on the condition of a Muslim arbitrator of their choosing.[47] According to Khadduri (also cited by Abu-Nimer), "both parties agreed to submit their dispute to a person chosen by them"[48][49] in accordance with the Arabian tradition of arbitration.[49]

Muir holds that the Qurayza surrendered on the condition that "their fate was decided by their allies, the Bani Aws".[43][50]

In all accounts, the appointed arbitrator was Sa'd ibn Mua'dh, a leading man among the Aws. During the Battle of the Trench, he had been one of Muhammad's emissaries to the Quarayza (see above)[43] and now was dying from a wound he had received later in the battle.[38][39][40][46] When Sa'd arrived, his fellow Aws pleaded for leniency towards the Qurayza and on his request pledged that they would abide by his decision.[9] He then pronounced that "the men should be killed, the property divided, and the women and children taken as captives". Muhammad approved of the ruling, calling it similar to God's judgment.[38][39][40][46] Chirāgh ʼAlī[who?] argues that this statement may have referred to "king" or "ruler" rather than God.[51]

Sa'd dismissed the pleas of the Aws, according to Watt because being close to death and concerned with his afterlife, he put what he considered "his duty to God and the Muslim community" before tribal allegiance.[8] Tariq Ramadan argues that Muhammad deviated from his earlier, more lenient treatment of prisoners as this was seen as "as sign of weakness if not madness"[44] and Peterson concurs that the Muslims wanted to deter future treachery by severe punishment.[9]

According to Stillman, Muhammad chose Sa'd so as not to pronounce the judgment himself after the precedents he had set with the Banu Qaynuqa and the Banu Nadir: "Sa`d took the hint and condemned the adult males to death and the hapless women and children to slavery." Furthermore, Stillman infers from Abu Lubaba's gesture that Muhammad had decided the fate of the Qurayza even before their surrender.[23]

Ibn Ishaq describes the killing of the Banu Qurayza men as follows:
“ Then they surrendered, and the apostle confined them in Medina in the quarter of d. al-Harith, a woman of B. al-Najjar. Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. Among them was the enemy of Allah Huyayy b. Akhtab and Ka`b b. Asad their chief. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900. As they were being taken out in batches to the apostle they asked Ka`b what he thought would be done with them. He replied, 'Will you never understand? Don't you see that the summoner never stops and those who are taken away do not return? By Allah it is death!' This went on until the apostle made an end of them. Huyayy was brought out wearing a flowered robe in which he had made holes about the size of the finger-tips in every part so that it should not be taken from him as spoil, with his hands bound to his neck by a rope. When he saw the apostle he said, 'By God, I do not blame myself for opposing you, but he who forsakes God will be forsaken.' Then he went to the men and said, 'God's command is right. A book and a decree, and massacre have been written against the Sons of Israel.' Then he sat down and his head was struck off.[38][39][52] ”

Several accounts note Muhammad's companions as executioners, Ali and Al-Zubayr in particular, and that each clan of the Aws was also charged with killing a group of Qurayza men.[21][41] Subhash Inamdar argues that this was done in order to avoid the risk of further conflicts between Muhammad and the Aws. According to Inamdar, Muhammad wanted to distance himself from the events and, had he been involved, would have risked alienating some of the Aws.[41]

It is also reported, that alongside all the men, one woman who had thrown a millstone from the battlements during the siege and killed one of the Muslim besiegers, was put to death.[53] Ibn Asakir writes in his History of Damascus that Banu Kilab, a clan of Arab clients of the Banu Qurayza, were killed alongside the Jewish tribe.[54]

Three boys of the clan of Hadl, who had been with Qurayza in the strongholds, slipped out before the surrender and converted to Islam. The son of one of them, Muhammad ibn Ka'b al-Qurazi, gained distinction as a scholar. One or two other men also escaped.

The spoils of battle, including the enslaved women and children of the tribe, were divided up either upon the warriors that had participated in the siege or among the emigrees from Mecca (who had hitherto depended on the help of the Muslims native to Medina.[55][56] Muhammad himself took a fifth of the value, as was customary among Muslims. As part of his share of the booty, Muhammad selected one of the women, Rayhana, and took her as part of his captives.[56] She is said to have later become a Muslim.[1] and Muhammad offered to free and marry her. According to some sources she accepted his proposal, while according to others she rejected it.[57]

Some of the women and children of the Banu Qurayza were bought and sold by Jews[8] ,in particular the Banu Nadir. Peterson argues that this is because the Nadir felt responsible for the Quarayza due to the role of their chieftain in the events.[9]

Walid N. Arafat and Barakat Ahmad have disputed that the Banu Qurayza were killed on a large scale.[58] Arafat disputes large-scale killings and argued that Ibn Ishaq gathered information from descendants of the Qurayza Jews, who embellished or manufactured the details of the incident.[59] Ahmad argues that only some of the leaders of the tribe were killed, while some of the fighters were taken prisoners.[60][61] Watt finds Arafat's arguments "not entirely convincing"[1], while Meir J. Kister has contradicted[clarification needed] the arguments of Arafat and Ahmad.[62]
[edit] Analysis

The Qur'an briefly refers to the incident in Surah 33:26[59] and Muslim jurists have looked upon Surah 8:55-58 as a justification of the treatment of the Banu Qurayza, arguing that the Qurayza broke the pact with Muhammad, and thus Muhammad was justified in repudiating his side of the pact and declaring war on the Qurayza.[39] Arab Muslim theologians and historians have either viewed the incident as "the punishment of the Medina Jews, who were invited to convert and refused, perfectly exemplify the Quran's tales of what happened to those who rejected the prophets of old" or offered a political explanation.[63]

In the 8th and early 9th century Muslim jurists, such as Ash-Shafii, based their judgments and decrees about collective punishment for treachery on the accounts of the demise of the Qurayza, with which they were well acquainted.[64] However, the proceedings of Muhammad with regard to the Banu Nadir and the Banu Qurayza were not taken as a model for the relationship of Muslim states toward its Jewish subjects.[65][66][67][68][clarification needed][69]

Paret[70] and Watt[8][71] say that the Banu Qurayza were killed not because of their faith but for "treasonable activities against the Medinan community".[8] Watt relates that "no important clan of Jews was left in Medina"[8] but he and Paret also note that Muhammad did not clear all Jews out of Medina.[70][71][72]

Aiming at placing the events in their historical context, Watt points to the "harsh political circumstances of that era"[8] and argues that the treatment of Qurayza was regular Arab practice.[73] Similar statements are made by Stillman[23], Paret[70], Lewis[74] and Rodinson.[56] On the other hand, Michael Lecker and Irving Zeitlin consider the events "unprecedented in the Arab peninsula - a novelty" and state that "prior to Islam, the annihilation of an adversary was never an aim of war."[54][75] Similar statements are made by Hirschberg[76] and Baron.[77]

Wikipedia

Aït Ayt
05-03-10, 22:20
De feiten zijn duidelijk.



feiten ? zonet noemde je het nog 'verhaaltjes' waar ik intrapte.. en nu zijn het ineens feiten ?

Slinger
05-03-10, 22:25
feiten ? zonet noemde je het nog 'verhaaltjes' waar ik intrapte.. en nu zijn het ineens feiten ?

Ik denk niet echt dat je er intrapt. Je weet beter. Als de Amerikanen een dergelijke moordpartij in Irak of Afghanistan zouden begaan, dan zou de wereld voor jou te klein zijn. En bij jouw geliefde Mohammed trap je er in? Ik geloof er niets van.

Jij wilt gewoon niets slechts van je grote voorbeeld horen.

Maar vertel me, hoe kan een man die dergelijke daden op zijn geweten heeft als een geloofwaardig boegbeeld van een godsdienst fungeren?

Hij is door toedoen van grote islamitische geschiedschrijvers, die de waarheid haarfijn uit de doeken hebben gedaan, al eeuwen geleden door de mand gevallen.

ELdorado
05-03-10, 22:33
feiten ? zonet noemde je het nog 'verhaaltjes' waar ik intrapte.. en nu zijn het ineens feiten ?


Ait :

come on :

Sorry, Don't be 'dumb" enough to "talk" to that dummy : waste of time :

he w'd sell his own mother for the highest offer ...too dumb too ...

I'll make him disappear from this forum, don't worry ....soon enough, my own way ...

I'll make him pay for the time i've been wasting tonight too ...

Slinger
05-03-10, 22:50
Ait :

come on :

Sorry, Don't be 'dumb" enough to "talk" to that dummy : waste of time :

he w'd sell his own mother for the highest offer ...too dumb too ...

I'll make him disappear from this forum, don't worry ....soon enough, my own way ...

I'll make him pay for the time i've been wasting tonight too ...

Ook hier heb je geen weerwoord tegen.

Het enige dat je kunt is het uiten van bedreigingen en vuile taal uitslaan.

Safe from behind your pc!

Coward!

Aït Ayt
06-03-10, 00:02
Ik denk niet echt dat je er intrapt. Je weet beter. Als de Amerikanen een dergelijke moordpartij in Irak of Afghanistan zouden begaan, dan zou de wereld voor jou te klein zijn. En bij jouw geliefde Mohammed trap je er in? Ik geloof er niets van.

amerikanen vallen moslims aan in afghanistan.. ze doden mannen, vrouwen en kinderen.. natuurlijk pik ik dat niet..
de profeet mohammed daarintegen voerde een heilige oorlog tegen onrecht, chaos en ongeloof.. daar heb ik heel veel bewondering voor..


Maar vertel me, hoe kan een man die dergelijke daden op zijn geweten heeft als een geloofwaardig boegbeeld van een godsdienst fungeren?

mede daardoor is hij juist extra geloofwaardig.. hij heeft zelf gestreden voor de verspreiding van de islaam.. hij heeft zijn eigen bloed, zweet en tranen gegeven.. daar heb ik enorm veel respect voor..

maar goed, ik begrijp dat jij het jodendom een uitermate ongeloofwaardige religie vindt vanwege de rol van de profeet mozes.. hij heeft immers eigenhandig 20000 mannen onthoofd en onder zijn bevel zijn steden uitgeroeid en is er op grote schaal moord en doodslag begaan onder mannen, vrouwen en kinderen.. in jouw optiek kan mozes geen geloofwaardig boegbeeld zijn van het jodendom..


Hij is door toedoen van grote islamitische geschiedschrijvers, die de waarheid haarfijn uit de doeken hebben gedaan,

ik ben blij dat je het als waarheid ziet.. ;)

Aït Ayt
06-03-10, 00:05
Ait :

come on :

Sorry, Don't be 'dumb" enough to "talk" to that dummy : waste of time :

he w'd sell his own mother for the highest offer ...too dumb too ...

I'll make him disappear from this forum, don't worry ....soon enough, my own way ...

I'll make him pay for the time i've been wasting tonight too ...

ach, slinger is een piece of cake om op te reageren.. dat doe ik tussen de bedrijven door..
no problem..


we selaam broeder

Slinger
06-03-10, 00:06
ik ben blij dat je het als waarheid ziet.. ;)

Lees maar eens goed wat ze schrijven over dit onderwerp.

Slinger
06-03-10, 00:24
amerikanen vallen moslims aan in afghanistan.. ze doden mannen, vrouwen en kinderen.. natuurlijk pik ik dat niet..
de profeet mohammed daarintegen voerde een heilige oorlog tegen onrecht, chaos en ongeloof.. daar heb ik heel veel bewondering voor..

Echt een strijd tegen onrecht. Als karavaanrover was hij onovertroffen.


maar goed, ik begrijp dat jij het jodendom een uitermate ongeloofwaardige religie vindt vanwege de rol van de profeet mozes.. hij heeft immers eigenhandig 20000 mannen onthoofd en onder zijn bevel zijn steden uitgeroeid en is er op grote schaal moord en doodslag begaan onder mannen, vrouwen en kinderen.. in jouw optiek kan mozes geen geloofwaardig boegbeeld zijn van het jodendom..

Ik bemoei me niet met het Joodse geloof, dat laat ik aan de Joden zelf over, maar als christen neem ik deze verhalen niet letterlijk.

DNA
06-03-10, 13:42
"The Mossad's Pulitzer prize murder !" by Johara Baker !

source: mediamonitors.net, Feb 28, 2010 :

http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/71928

"...here comes the overriding philosophy that israel espouses & which the west in particular so surprisingly accepts time & again .
Becuase it is a nation founded on guilt & on the belief that most of the world is "against them" , israel so_called security considerations justify any & all abominations ,first & foremost murder .
This is the logic israel used in the killing of over 1400 palestinians in the Gaza strip and the rationale for the killing of Abu Jihad, Sheikh Yassin & Abdul Aziz Rantisi....