Archive article: https://archive.ph/LJPiZ
A new survey showing that 82 percent of Jewish Israelis support the expulsion of Gazans was met with disbelief among those who stubbornly believe that the extremists are outliers. But these trends are as consistent as they are shocking
as someone with Israeli friends, I always figured this to be the case. they bemoan having to think about bomb shelters because of the occasional rocket that gets fired over into israel. they legitimately believe that Muslim countries hate them, and Muslims in general want to kill them. they live in the Old testament of the Bible, and anything that happens to Gaza is the will of God.
This is plausible, but not entirely without a reason. I stopped taking sides in this mess long ago.
Jews and Muslims have had many extensive periods of peace living together (including in Palestine before the state of Israel). The story of Islamic-Jewish hostilities is actually fairly recent and shorter than you’d expect.
Antisemitism as we know it today is mostly a European export to the Middle East.
“Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. … Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice.”
— David Ben Gurion. Quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan’s “Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938
Counter-argument: 7oct attacks wasn’t a defense operation. Before you tell me that it was a revenge or “didn’t happen in a vacuum”, then, again, this is why I refuse to take a clear side as both sides have done terrible things. I’d understand them hitting settlers, but fucking tourists enjoying a concert? Naah. Let them fight it out, I have problems of my own (I’m from East Europe with looming russian invasion)
You’d be wrong though. Hamas targeted soldiers not tourists. You are blaming the deaths resulting from the Hannibal Directive on Hamas.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-officers-invoked-defunct-hannibal-protocol-during-oct-7-fighting-report/
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-07/israel-hannibal-directive-kidnap-hamas-gaza-hostages-idf/104224430
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/yoav-gallant-admits-to-authorising-hannibal-directive-during-october-7-attack-7663931
Putting Hannibal Directive aside. Let’s say if Russian troops occupied your country for a number of years or decades and eventually hosted a concert on your former hometown, then some resistance group ended up killing some tourists at the concert during the crossfire. Would you be both-siding it?
Let’s assume you would view both sides: the invaders and the resistance as bad, would that justify a genocide?
Honestly, as a history buff, you don’t make much sense to me. Look up what Roman empire did in that region and how name Palestine came to be (around 300ce). You might realize how calling me wrong in that context is pretty ignorant. I’m staying centric.
Another fun reading for you: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ancient_Israel_and_Judah
How is this relevant to 2025? But because you brought it up, here’s a quote by none other than Israel’s first prime minister.
Also the Roman Exile ended with the Muslim conquest of the Levant.
So how again are you staying a centrist on a genocide of the indigenous peoples by foreign settlers? Mr./Mrs. History Buff? Does it make sense to go near 2000 years to justify a genocide when the modern settlers aren’t even from the region? Would you do the same and say Russians are Balto-Slavic people and returning to their ancestral lands? There’s more a more recent genetic and historical presence in Eastern Europe for Russians than there is for Zionist settlers in Palestine.
The origin and migration of Slavs in Europe between the 5th and 10th centuries AD:
Because it borderline sounded like you claimed Jews simply appeared there during WW2 and started occupying whatever they could. That is factually wrong as there is a deep Jewish history to said region. And before you throw some genetic argument at me about how those are Europeans that migrated here, understand that Jews are ethnoreligious group, not a genetic group like slavs. It doesn’t matter if you, a muslim, were born in opposite side of the world. There is a place where it will be always sacred for you, a home, written in blood and history, a home disregarded by many, but then those many keep finding Jewish artifacts there.
Your upcoming quote pretty much confirmed what I’m trying to say.
I was quite clear about “both sides are terrible”. That is in no way justification for any of their actions, it roughly translates to “This shit is fucked up so hard from all sides that I can’t get morally invested in this for my own sanity and rather focus on my own region”. If you actually assumed that I’m supporting Israel’s actions, then you haven’t been following what I’m saying.
But the thing is, that argument is never used in real life, by anyone, and so you’re not hearing counter-arguments. No one is saying that Russia wants to take over Baltics because genetic or historical presence. That is simply not an argument here, and I don’t think you fully understand what “Slav” is, as it’s not some Russian origins. At least I’m not aware of it. I also never claimed that about Israel and Gaza (you keep assuming things, falsely). Israel has expanded far beyond what is theirs.
It started before WW2, but that’s basically what happened. It is a colonizing mission and they admit it themselves.
It does matter. Muslims from Malaysia or wherever have no right to expel the indigenous people of Makkah and Medina if one day they converted to another religion. Just because they Zionist invaders are Jews doesn’t give them a right to colonize Palestine. Palestinians don’t lose their right to their ancestral lands because they are no longer practicing Judaism or Christianity. It is not a sensible argument. Would neo-pagans who worship Zeus have a right to expel Greeks because the majority of Greeks today are Christian? Zionist settlers have no legal or historical right to Palestine.
So Russians only need to make the argument for them to have the right to colonize the rest of Eastern Europe? Russians are Slavs who speak a Slavic language.
None of it is theirs. European, Iranian, Amazigh and Indian settlers reviving Hebrew and practicing Judaism are still not indigenous to Palestine and have no claims to it whatsoever.
Yeah to be fair this is true, and I bet a lot of the Palestinians would wish for all the Israelis to leave
Wouldn’t you? I don’t think anyone would be okay with being relegated to less than 20% of their land by foreign invaders
To be fair, the Palestinians had not choice in their occupying force and would have realised any group taking their land and displacing them.
“they legitimately believe that Muslim countries hate them, and Muslims in general want to kill them”
Do you have any experience with the press in their neighboring countries? There are absolutely some sources pushing this narrative in the opinion sections from time to time. I used to read The Daily Star (Lebanon) to follow Israeli news from a non-Israeli perspective and would see this in that paper a few times a year.
By no means am I suggesting that the billions of Muslims uniformly want to kill Israelis but the percentage that does isn’t zero.
Yet Jews had their Golden Age in Spain during Muslim rule before the Reconquista.
This hate is easily explained by reading what Zionist leaders have said themselves:
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”
David Ben-Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.
IMO A kid from Palestine put it best in my first IR class “Why did my grandparents have to lose their home and everything in it because of European anti-semitism?”
On the other hand, Israel is an existential threat to every nation around it. If there was an aggressive theocratic ethnostate expansionist threatening your border, wouldn’t you hate them?
Israel doesn’t just want Palestine. They want the West Bank, Gaza, and all or large chunks of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt. Expelling the Gazans from Gaza won’t solve this. The Israelis want to do the following:
Expel the Gazans just over the border into shanty towns in neighboring countries.
Some displaced people in those areas will inevitably sneak back over the border to carry out revenge attacks against the people that stole their homes.
When (2) happens, use that as a justification to invade neighboring countries and seize additional land.
Israel has been slowly expanding its borders this way for decades. They seize an area of land, declare it a military buffer zone, but then let their civilians move into the buffer zone. They use their own population as human shields, putting them in danger of attacks by displaced Arabs. Then when this happens, they use this as an excuse to expand their borders further.
If you had a psychopathic country for a neighbor, that intended to slowly gobble up your own nation bit by bit, wouldn’t you want them all dead?
Israel isn’t a theocratic state. Im not sure why you would even suggest that it was as their PM is not a religious figure.
Pedantry is the last refuge of the ignorant.
Im not being pedantic. If you think Israel is a theocratic state you have no idea what a theocracy is. If your understanding of philosophy is so underdeveloped what value could your opinion have?
They are not wrong though, there are plenty of Muslims in the surrounding states that believe Jewish people are evil and should be exterminated, not because of anything happening in the real world but because they are being told that they’ll have to fight and kill them during the end times anyway.
Israel is an existential threat to its neighbors. The hate isn’t irrational. It’s perfectly reasonable.
And Palestine is being ethnically cleansed and genocided by the same apocalyptic Jewish and Christian thinking. Religious apocalypticism aside, in Palestine there is a clear victim and aggressor. You don’t even have to take my words for it. Take Israel’s first prime minister’s words:
“Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. … Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice.” — David Ben Gurion. Quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan’s “Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.
What a stupid comment.
Jew lived in yemen - Iraq - Palestine - Egypt - Morocco - Iran for hundred of years. Saying Arab hate jew is propaganda.
The hate is for Israeli and those who supported them through the year while they genocide - destroy villages- cites- farms- didnt allow people to go back home… in fact they kick them out of their own home and allowing an American zionist Jew to just take the land.
They build shelter because they know they are a colony and sooner or later people of the land will attempt to get them back. Not because “Arab hate them”
Jews lived in these countries not as equal citizens with full rights, but as second class citizens who had to endure centuries of oppression. There’s a reason why the moment Israel formed, all these countries committed some of the worst pogroms in history and expelled their Jewish populations. Around 1 million Jews in the muslim had their property, communities, and citizenship stripped from them for the crime of being Jewish… even though they had no connection to Israel whatsoever. Since Israel was the only place to take to them in, that’s where they ended up going.
Also it’s inaccurate to say “Arabs hate Jews” because Arab is an ethnicity. There are a lot of Arab Jews and being Arab is not tied to any ideology. It’s more accurate to say “mulsims hate Jews” because are tied to an ideology, islam, and the islamic scriptures are very explicit that Jews are evil and should be either killed or treated as second class citizens… hence how the Jews in the countries above were living in such unjust conditions in the countries above prior to the creation of Israel.
Yet Jews had their Golden Age in Spain under Muslim rule and returned to Jerusalem after a 500 year Roman exile after the Muslim conquest of the Levant.
They were lured to Israel but with the exception of Egypt they weren’t expelled. Iraq went as far as prohibiting Jews from leaving and the Mossad did false flag attacks to encourage them to leave secretly.
What golden age lmao? islam is crystal clear that it has to be established as the superior religion of the land and that all the religions under it must be treated as inferior by having them be subjugated to additional restrictions like having to pay a jizya tax and being treated as second class citizens. Btw this only applies to religions that fall under the label of “people of the book”, aka, Abrahamic monotheistic religions. Other religions, like European Paganism or Hinduism didn’t get anything, islam says that they should either be killed, forced to convert to islam, or taken in as slaves.
Until the West started protecting them after WWII, Jews were not treated well for centuries. They’re still not treated well today. Several muslim countries today still don’t allow Jews to live inside their borders.
I’m actually from Iraq so I actually understand what happened more than you. You see, Jews in Iraq were always subject to oppression, discrimination, and violence. Whenever something goes bad in the country, religious and ethnic minorities like Jews, Christians, and Kurds face the wrath of events called “farhud”. The word loosely translates to “looting” but the actual translation is pogrom. A farhud is when you get a huge mob of angry muslims going into minority neighborhoods and towns and destroying everything. They would kill people, kindnap women, destroy their houses/businesses/religious institutions, and they steal anything they can get their hands on. My family comes from an ethnoreligious minority in Iraq (called Mandaeism), and all the minorities in Iraq saw were subject to this type of violence after the 2003 US invasion.
Anyway, when it comes to the Jews in the country, in 1941 they suffered an extremely bad farhud. This was before the establishment of Israel, this was before the end of WWII, and this was during the holocaust. You see, during this time, muslim Arabs in general were very much fond of the Nazis. The Nazis and the muslim Arabs had a lot of shared goals and desires, they both hated the British/French and wanted to see them defeated, they both hated and wanted to exterminate Jews, and they both thought of themselves as superior and wanted to cleanse their lands of minorities.
The thing is at the time, Iraq was ruled by a royal family that was put there by the British, kind of like Jordan is today. This royal family was kind of supportive of the allies and they wanted to maintain a secular order that allows minorities. Iraqi Arab muslims (both sunni and shia) despised that so much so that there was enough support to foster a pro-Nazi fascist coup attempt in 1941. During the coup, the monarch at the time got ousted and was replaced by, Rashid Ali al-Gaylani, the fascist leader of the coup for a few months.
His reign was no stable but still, he had enough power to terrorize the Jews in Iraq. They were constantly subject to intimidation and violence where they would get their houses painted to mark them or told that they were being moved to detention camps asap. After a few months of this, the British sent in support to squash his regime and reestablish the monarchy, and they did. But the fascist regime’s defeat saw the country’s Arab muslim population rage and they accused the Jews and other minorities of supporting the British and their influence.
What ensued was two days of anarchy where the muslim population went into the Jewish neighborhoods of Baghdad (where most of Iraq’s Jews lived) and they committed one of the worst farhud’s in the country’s history. They killed hundreds, they injured thousands, they destroyed entire neighborhoods, and stole everything they could. Most of the Jews in the country either fled to other cities (which also had their own farhuds but not as bad) or to neighboring countries like Iran and Jordan. These people either stayed outside the country as refugees or were forced to go back despite the danger.
The antisemitism in Iraq was very strong even after WWII, and the Jews of the country were traumatized from what they went through so they lived their lives covertly. In the 1950s Mossad started their operations to get Jews to migrate to Israel, and at the time, they had shared interests with the muslims in the country. They both wanted to drive the Jews out of the country no matter what. And so another wave of terrorism took place, and this time the Jews packed their bags and left Iraq for good. Mostly to Israel as it was finally established and was the most welcoming place for them.
These people did nothing wrong, but they lost their homes, businesses, community (some of which are thousands of years old), and their citizenship. Why? Because they’re Jewish, that’s it. It doesn’t matter what terminology you use to describe what happened, the point is that these people were driven out of their countries and had nowhere to go but Israel. This wasn’t just the case in Iraq, but all over the muslim world. Nearly 1 million Jews had to relocate to Israel due persecution. This is why when people try to pretend that Israel/Palestine conflict is one sided are so mind numbingly ignorant.
You may want to reattach your arse. Wikipedia has a whole article about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_age_of_Jewish_culture_in_Spain
Contrast that with how non-Jews faired and are fairing under Jewish rule. The Torah instructs the elimination of other people, just read what it says about the Amalekites and Midianites. The Jewish king of Yemen burnt 4000-20000 Christians. Israel today even before the genocide in Gaza subjugated Palestinians to brutal and humiliating rule, where they are imprisoned, tortured and forcefully evicted from their homes.
We are all aware of how brutal Christians have been to non-Christians, I don’t need to cite any examples.
You are engaging in historical revisionism. Jews weren’t persecuted or expelled in Iraq, the Mossad engaged in false flag operations and smuggling of Jews. Zionism and Jewish migration to Palestine predate WW2 and the Holocaust, and the Mossad in various forms was active before 1948. Zionist gangs had already committed massacres against the Palestinians in the 1930s. The Iraqi government tried to prevent Jews from leaving. Iraq at the time was also under British mandate, it wasn’t an independent state. I suggest reading what Avi Shlaim an Iraqi Jewish scholar and historian wrote about it, you seem to be parroting the Zionist narrative without any evidence: https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2023/09/the-history-of-arab-jews-can-change-our-understanding-of-the-world
The Nazis sure, but the Arab Muslims? That’s an ignorant take. You ignore 1500 years of Jewish history in the Arab and Muslim world and the influential role they played. And instead claim Muslims wanted to exterminate Jews based on violence that happened in reaction to Zionism, and use it as justification for Zionism. Completely ignoring the role of false flag attacks in the resulting chaos. https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/avi-shlaim-proof-israel-zionist-involvement-iraq-jews-attacks European Jewish migration to Palestine started before WW2. Zionist violence against Palestinians was already a common occurrence in the 1930s. Zionists were already trying to lure Arab Jews to Palestine before the end of WW2. The only Arab government that expelled its Jews was Egypt as a consequence of the 1967 war after some were caught spying for Israel. Every other Arab government was either ambivalent or tried to stop Jewish migration to Palestine.
How does that justify the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestine? Palestinians had no say in the matter. Palestinians don’t owe Jewish people reparations for what happened to them in Egypt, Iraq or elsewhere. Arabs aren’t some generic people. If you were from Iraq, you should know that Iraq on its own is diverse with different factions with varying and conflicting interests. You can’t turn around and claim that Iraqis and Palestinians are generic Arabs and what Iraqis did to Jews, justify the crimes Israel is committing against Palestinians.
Palestine isn’t Iraq. What happened in Iraq doesn’t justify what’s happening in Palestine, even if you insist that the attacks weren’t false flags, which they were.
In the conflict between Israel and Palestine. there’s an aggressor and a victim. A colonizer and a colonized. What happened to Jews in Europe or other countries is not relevant and doesn’t justify the crimes and genocide they inflicted upon Palestinians.
PS: I recommend you read and watch what Avi Shlaim has to say about it. As an Iraqi Jew who has lived through that turbulent time and a historian he is far more qualified than someone who parrots Zionist propaganda and historical revisionism. His accounts are first hand and he is a historian. You repeat the same Zionist argument that justifies brutalizing Palestinians based on what happened in Iraq 80 years ago.
Palestine Talks | Professor Avi Shlaim says “anti-Semitism was an European, not Arab problem”
Did you even read the article? It clearly states what I stated. islam allows religious minorities that fall under “people of the book” label (aka, monotheistic Abrahamic religions) to exist under islam, not as equals but as inferior second class citizens with limited rights. This article just states that the persecution was worse for Jews in Christian Europe, not that things were good in Iberia. There are even a few historians in this very article that argue that this label for this time period doesn’t actually align with reality.
The Farhud of Baghdad, took place in 1941, that’s before the establishment of Israel (1948) and before the end of WWII (19450). Everything that I said, you could easily find in this article or any article about this event:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farhud
Yes, but Mossad didn’t try to get Jews in other countries to migrate to Israel until after Israel was established after the 1948 war.
And vice versa.
Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Hebron_massacre
You keep repeating this like a broken record, but all your doing is demonstrating your ignorance. The Iraq government forbade Jews from emigrating to Israel AFTER the 1948 war. The farhud happened in 1941, that’s 7 years prior. Also, this policy last two years and the Iraqi government reversed it in 1950, this was the called de-naturalization law
https://scholarlypublishingcollective.org/psup/pir/article/1/2/392/390094/The-Denationalization-of-Iraqi-Jews-The-Legal-and
The British mandate ended in 1932. Again, you keep spreading misinformation that can easily be fact checked with a single 10 second google search.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Iraq
He was born in 1945, the farhud happened in 1941. I know for a fact you didn’t read his memoir and you have no idea who this guy is. It doesn’t take an acadmic to figure that the article you posted is propaganda that bastardized his work. First of all, his memoir, Three Worlds: Memoirs of an Arab-Jew, mainly talks about the events AFTER 1948 when Israel was established and he talks about how he and his family were forced to migrate to Israel 1951 (He was 6 at the time). He states that during this time, Mossad was did a bunch of operations that tried to force Jews to migrate to Israel, and if you actually scroll up and read, you’ll see that I have mentioned all of these details.
Don’t call something ignorant when you have no idea what you’re talking about. This isn’t some hidden secret or some controversial opinion, it’s literally fact. You can scroll through this list or the lists that continue it and find hundreds of examples of the Arab muslim world trying to get rid of Jews:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_antisemitism
This is also relevant:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relations_between_Nazi_Germany_and_the_Arab_world#Arab_world_perceptions_of_Hitler_and_Nazism
That’s precisely the issue, you’re ignoring 1400 (that’s how old islam is) of history for a bullshit narrative that’s not based in reality. This is a good example of that. The Farhud in Baghdad had NOTHING to do with zionism. You’re such a dunce that you cannot comprehend that antisemtism in the muslim world has existed LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG before the creation of Israel, and I literally gave you an example with the farhud. You’re not willing to accept the reality. If you think antisemtism in the muslim world started as a reaction to zionism, then your understand of this region is nonexistent.
I already covered this, so I’m going to move on to the next thing.
The entire point why I brought these people up is to showcase how these people are victims who ended up in Israel as a product of circumstance that was beyond their control. They weren’t there for “reparations” or as voluntary “colonialists” as your narrative likes to portray. This is like saying the Vietnamese refugees who fled to the US in the 70s and 80s after Vietnam’s neighboring countries kicked them out, only went to North America to colonize the Native Americans. It’s just an ignorant take on something that’s clearly more complex.
Yes and no. You are correct in the sense that Arab culture is diverse and the ethnic groups that were Arabized through islamic imperialist conquest still remain distinct. However, Arab is still an ethnicity itself. It’s important to understand that despite the diversity, Arabs still view themselves as one. This is less true today because we’ve had around a century of Arabic states being independent, but after WWI, this was very much the case. Arabs back then didn’t see themselves as Saudi, Iraqi, or Syrian, etc. They thought of these new states as fake and they just saw themselves as Arabs in the Arab nation. It’s not inaccurate to talk about Arabs as a cohesive group, especially during the time period we’re discussing, because they did think and act as one nation.
You’re right in the first half, but you’re still missing the point in the second. It doesn’t matter if they were false flags, real flags, or no flags. What matters is that these events happened, and as a result of them, innocent people who done absolutely nothing wrong ended up in Israel by no fault of their own. What happened to the Palestinians during the Nakba was wrong, but what happened to the Jews in rest of Palestine and the muslim world at large was also wrong. These people and their descendants who are in Israel today deserve to be there as much as Palestinians deserve to be there. That’s why this conflict isn’t black and white.
And this framing is wrong. It might be true today in the West Bank, it might be true back when Zionism was still only a movement, but from that point until today so much has happened that makes this narrative a gross misrepresentation of history. I’ll give you an example to demonstrate how using oversimplified revisionist narratives is bullshit. Anatolia for most of history was split between Armenians in the east and Greeks in the West. Then the Turks came in from central Asia and they committed a bunch genocides, colonized Anatolia, and became what is today Turkey. Turkey has yet to stop it’s colonization and genocidal efforts, and the effects of o all these events (past and present) can still be felt today.
Yet despite this, so much has happened in Turkey’s history that trying to boil it down to “Turkey bad” where the aggressor and the colonizer and Greece, Armenia, Kurdistan, etc are victims and the colonized is just ignorant. It ignores all the wars waged on by Greece or the Kurds or Armenia or the persecutions the Turks faced or the people who were forced to seek refugee in Turkey like Circassians and Tatars. It also ignores the fact that the Turks have been there for generations or that the people and government are not the same thing even if a portion of society supports the government. It doesn’t justify Turkey’s past or present atrocities, nor does it justify the atrocities against it, but you can’t operate from a narrative driven framework that’s not based in reality. The same applies here.
History is not zionist propaganda. Though I suppose to someone who consumes nothing but propaganda such as yourself, actual history does seem like revisionist propaganda. Regardless, everything that I have said can easily be verified and sourced. If I forgot to source something, then just show me the claim and I’ll provide a source.
He literally hasn’t… how can he possibly experience an event when he wasn’t even born? Here’s a real account from an Iraqi Jew that did actually live through event:
https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2021/03/22/the-farhud-massacre-and-the-jews-of-baghdad-through-the-eyes-of-a-child-survivor-march-23/
I don’t even know what to say to you, but your interpretation of what I wrote is so over the top that I can just assume that you’re trolling. I especially liked the bit where you turned some Muslims into all Arabs, as if they are one and the same and all the same.
It’s also starting to get really obvious isn’t it? I mean, you really have to be provincial. I’m actually thinking of moving to the country and trying bigotry for a bit myself. You know, before we’ve missed it completely. It’s just that there’s a really good shawarma place round the corner from us here.
“lived”
plenty of non-Muslims too
Can you elucidate?
The tl;dr is that an antichrist-like figure, the Dajjal, will appear during the end times, leading to a battle between his followers and the righteous. The more extreme interpretations claim that all or almost all Jews will be on the Dajjal’s side. Example:
Other groups mentioned as mostly falling to the Dajjal, depending who you ask, are singers and musicians (because music is sinful I’m assuming), Bedouins, women, Turks and probably many others. It’s just one of these things that lends itself to being instrumentalized.
It’s always some obscure quote from the hadith about some homicidal tree. Most Muslims, like the other Abrahamic faithful, are just trying to stop trans people from having abortions.
Jews are not central to the Dajjal (antichrist) story. It is only mentioned that his army of followers will have tens of thousands of Jews in it coming from the east (could be China, or anywhere between china and the Levant). The foretold events point to a post-“Israel” world.
The “tree” hadith is relevant. And the trees are not magical or “homicidal”. The hadith points to the high-tech military/surveillance apparatus turning on “Israel” at some point (with a single exception). The hadith just drew the picture in a way the people of the time could comprehend.
Between the aftermath of the “State of Israel” experiment, and the supposed appearance of the antichrist, it wouldn’t be surprising if many Jews, especially religious non-Zionist ones, sought refuge and lived among Muslims again, like they always did throughout history. Given the raising extreme vitriol against all Jews, in the west and elsewhere, in part due to the actions of the world Zionist-capitalist cabal, I would say this could be more likely to happen than not. This of course assumes that things will shake out in a way where Muslims, or some of them at least, will actually rule themselves, and the colonially-manufactured client mini-states of today will also be no more.
Maybe that cabal will switch sides at some point and go to China. And that’s how they will become a part of the antichrist movement. Or maybe not. The world could change many time over between the end of “Israel” and the supposed appearance of the antichrist. We don’t know.
My point was that it was a “hadith” quote, as opposed to being from the Quran. Muslims frequently ignore hadith or give them such a wide interpretation as to give them negligible relevance. To simply infer the active beliefs of real Muslim people, or any religious group, from literal interpretations of cherry picked passages of secondary religious texts is ignorant nonsense. (Especially in 2025 when can just ask them directly over a round of Fortnite.)
Even when considering the antichrist stories (which appear in the New Testament), core principles in the Quran state that “believing” Jews, Christians and Muslims (and maybe even unlabelled monotheists) will be rewarded by God (2:62), and warns Muslims against trying to judge or assume “belief” in others (49:12, 4:94). This message also appears throughout the teachings of Jesus (e.g. Matthew 7:1-5), who Muslims consider to be a prophet of God.
Even if we carefully and collectively decide to determine a group as “bad”. We can, and arguably should, do that without recourse to religious prophecy. For example, if we collectively decide (e.g. UN, ICJ, ICC) that the group is carrying out an ethnic cleansing or genocide, based on real world evidence, interpreting a hadith prophecy to support that doesn’t add weight in any objective sense.
Your argument seems to be that the Hadith is totally irrelevant. Hamas and the person you’re replying to seem to think otherwise. Maybe it isn’t irrelevant just because it isn’t in the Quran and has a passage about shouty trees in it? Religions are hardly consistent, especially at the fringes.
The hadith is secondary commentary. It is supposed to be considered (in its historic and underlying Quranic context), rather than followed. As a third party, what can we conclude from reading it in isolation without any real world evidence or reference to the actual Muslim people giving it that consideration? Nothing beyond speculation.
Uh, no. They live in the living memory of the Six-Day War. I’m not going to defend the behavior of the current Israeli government, but in no way are they just living out the biases the Old Testament when they think neighboring Arab states are antagonistic to them. They remember 1967, and if you think that all neighboring Arab states have done a 180 from where they were then, you’re very much wrong.
The 1967 war was preemptive. Israel started it. Then again, they also started the 1948 war in November 1947 months before Arab armies got involved.
https://theintercept.com/2017/06/05/a-50-year-occupation-israels-six-day-war-started-with-a-lie/
1967 is notably two decades into the ethnonationalist colonial project that displaced many Palestinians from their homes.
You picked a bad start date for Arab/Jewish trouble in Palestine. You also appear to ignore how the other Arab states screwed over the Palestinians to keep them desperate.
But I didn’t comment to debate this. I commented to disabuse the notion that Israel is using the Iron Age to think what they think. Neither are the Arabs.
But they are stuck in the Iron Age. They believe God gave them Palestine.
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?” David Ben-Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.
[emphasis mine]