Is the green party starting to regret it's association with Islamists?

[mids2019]

The green party, ostensibly about climate protection and general progressive values seems to have gotten into bed with Islamist sympathisers and the amount of anti semitism and basic hatred of their own country is now obvious.

The green party now at least locally are known as a party that has sympathies towards all manner of Islamist causes including Hamas's objective to wipe Israel of the face of the Earth.

Wouldn't be surprised if they produce a motion declaring climate change a Jewish conspiracy........

Perhaps it would be more relevant to consider that Israel is mentioned dozens of times in the Quran - and Palestine is not mentioned once.

(I presume you don’t think that Mohammed was a mythical figure?)

Again you are desperately attempting to distract with irrelevant nonsense because your previous straw man has been called out.

A religious book yes but one that has good solid archaeological evidence to a lot of its claims

Not religious myself but I don't think any archaeologist or historian has ever disputed the basic fact of the book. Stories and miracles or even people can be in dispute but not the facts that Jewish people were there, various conflicts and enslavements that happened.

Mohamed is definitely a historical figure. Whether his message was divine is questionable.

I really would love to debate with you but I really need more than just sound bites to work with.

Please give me something to support that claim. I have read so many books to see if anyone can even begin to explain, historically, what is in the Torah. Just give me one story that could be verified.

Only a historical figure in the sense that there was a war lord in the area with that name at the time. Anything else was not historical evidence but stuff written a long time after he would have died. Even the Quran does not mention Muhammad by name. There are a couple of iffy mentions of a person that could easily be Jesus. The Hadiths however tell the story of Muhammad, they were put together even longer after Muhammad would have lived. In fact so long that nobody that wrote them would have been alive when he was about. Really historical evidence that is!

Think you need to reread my post. You obviously didn't understand what I was saying.

"A religious book yes but one that has good solid archaeological evidence to a lot of its claims"

I reread it and no, I don't understand what you are saying other than that sentence. Please enlighten me.

So are you saying there is no evidence that Mohamed existed? I'm questioning his divine message but I don't think any historian would doubt his existence.

Singled out makes it out of context so can see why you choose to single out that sentence. Anyway what that sentence means in the context of what I am saying is there is the evidence of claims about Jews/the people of Israel being on the land is literally in the land along side the land of its neighbouring countries by way of archeology.

I have explained in my post

We know there is historical evidence of a warlord called Muhammad that lived in the area at that time

However even the Quran doesn't talk about Muhammad that came later in the Hadiths. By the time Muhammad was mentioned there was a lot going on politically with the dead warlords men and a power struggle in the region. This means that something had to be done to unite the people before the current leadership lost control. Thus enters Muhammad the prophet into the story

I have given you a brief summary of how Muhammad's story isn't particularly cut and dry. However you can probably find a YouTube video or book about this subject if you look.

The interesting thing about the message of the Quran is if you take way the Hadiths and Muhammad the message and what tbe Quran is changes in an interesting way. I will let you think on that and come to your own conclusions.

Personal from a fighting extreme Islamist point of view in a debate I actually like to keep Muhammad and the Hadiths into the story. The Hadiths are pretty damn good evidence that these people are very very wrong in following Muhammad or hating Jewish people or claiming that Israel should be destroyed.

That poster has descended to “Oh look, a squirrel!”

Which translates as “Oh shit, I’ve run out of arguments. So I’ll try to derail the discussion into something entirely different so that you won’t discuss the topic that I don’t want you to talk about.”

I really don't understand your logic. I understand the need for Israelis to demonise Islam in order to somehow justify their treatment of the Palestinians. What I don't understand though is how allowing Palestinians to have dignity and self determination means a total destruction of the Israeli people. That sounds like an Israeli excuse to me.

What is the argument you are both trying to make?

I have been talking about Muhammad, the Quran, Hadiths and Islamic extremists. You really have gone of on a tangent of your own making.

I get what others are saying about you liking to derail a thread if you have nothing of value to debate with however I was actually enjoying this particular derailed because study of the Abrahamic books and debate is an interesting of mine.

May start a thread at some point called To Fatwa me or not to Fatwa me. That way we can talk about this without derailing that is annoying for others. The title is because I can't imagine the thread will be much appreciated or well reserved.

Goodnight

Trouble in paradise

Please do! It sounds really interesting.

I was never debating Islam, you chose to do that. I was simply talking about the claim that Israelis think they have a claim to the land from some bizarre idea that their ancestors lived their thousands of years ago gives them some moral right to kick people who have lived there for hundreds of years off the land.

Why would you find that interesting. If I'm wrong I apologise but I get the impression you have no interest in Islam.

Not engaging with your nonsensical, spurious allegations based on nothing whatsoever.

I think we're finally starting to agree on something. Engaging with nonsensical spurious allegations based on nothing whatsoever is the issue I've been having too.

Well if he was able to predict the existence of a country hundreds of years before it came into existence that would be worth taking seriously right?

Or, alternatively, Israel long pre-dates the invention of Islam and was well known at the time.

Which do you think is more likely?

https://www.alhakam.org/what-does-the-quran-say-about-israel-and-palestine

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=60voY2Qn0lk&t=289s&pp=2AGhApACAQ%3D%3D&ra=m

You tried to pretend that the only way Israel could have existed before 1948 is if the characters in the Torah could be proved to have existed.

You’re clearly not interested in engaging in good faith.

The snp want independence from the rest of Britain. does that make Scottish people racist against the English, N Irish and Welsh?