Jump to content
Islamic Forum
dot

The Protocols Of Zion - بروتوكولات حكماء صهيون

Recommended Posts

Throughout the world today, quite a few intellectuals, politicians, and historians oppose Zionism. Various Christian and Jewish thinkers and authors condemn it and the israeli governments' Zionist policies, as do various academics in israeli universities such as the late israel Shahak or Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, who criticize israeli violence directed against Palestinians and who maintain that peace can be acheived only when israel forsakes its Zionist ideology. Noam Chomsky, himself a Jew, has written many books and articles that are highly critical of Zionism and the policies of those countries that support it.

 

A group of Jewish academics, the self-proclaimed "new historians," has been exposing the "sacred lies" embedded in official israeli policy, and the truths associated with them, since the early 1980s. Its members, namely, Benny Morris, Ilan Pappe, Avi Shlaim, Tom Segev, Baruch Kimmerling, Simha Flappan, and Joel Miqdal, are provoking strong reactions from Jews with Zionist leanings. They deal with the following "sacred lies": Arabs are racially inferior to Jews, israel is a small country trying to survive in a region surrounded by enemies, all Palestinians are terrorists who want to destroy israel, and these crazy terrorists deserve every kind of retaliation etc. Tom Segev, for example, one of the most prominent of these "new historians," has this to say of israel's "official" history: "Until very recently, we did not have real history in this country; we had mythology." This just criticism, once offered only by Muslim academics and scholars, is now being expressed more loudly by many Jewish and Christian academics who are attempting to evaluate history in an unbiased manner.

 

These people, having witnessed the horrors of the Zionist ideology, see it as yet another of the colonialist ideologies founded in nineteenth-century racism. They give no credence to the myth that israel is "a small and lonely country, surrounded by enemies who want to destroy it." To the contrary: israel, through its actions, has proven to be a violent country that follows a policy of oppression and aggression.

 

But these thinkers, strategists, and writers have more in common than just their opposition to Zionism. The most important common denominator between them is that each has been accused of anti-Semitism. Anyone who has used historical facts and documents about events occuring in Palestine and then written an article or book criticizing Zionism has been accused of being anti-Semitic. The latest example is the British television channel BBC. The crew members who were preparing a documentary about the 1982 massacres in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, as well as the station directors who broadcast it, were accused of anti-Semitism by the israeli government.

 

This, actually, is a technique used by Zionists and pro-Zionists for slandering and neutralizing those who criticize Zionism. Zionists have even devised a term to slander such Jews: "self-hating Jew." This term also is used to describe Jews who criticize israel, aiming to present them as traitors suffering from some psychological dilemma. Zionists who make such claims, no doubt, seek to sabotage the work of their opponents.

 

Source:

 

1) Jonathan Mahler, "Uprooting the Past - israel's New Historians Take a Hard Look at Their Nation's Past,"

 

2- Gideon Levy, Book Review, "Correcting a Mistake - Jews and Arabs in Palestine/israel, 1936-1956 by Benny Morris," Ha'aretz, November 3, 2000.

 

3- israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion and the Weight of Three Thousand Years, (AMEU: 1994), p. 5.

 

4- Baudouin Loos, "An Interview of Ilan Pappe," November 29 1999,

 

5- Neve Gordon, "An Antiwar Movement Grows in israel," The Nation, February 25, 2002.

 

6- Neve Gordon, "An Antiwar Movement Grows in israel," The Nation, February 25, 2002.

 

 

Based on the article above, I can conclude that Zionist historians have corrupted history into a lie to favor and condone Zionism and Zionist interest and goals.

brindel-back.......You always insult and slander brother Yasnov because you know that Yasnov is right. You deny the speech freedom of educated people by calling them phony professors, charlatans, imposters , indoctrinated men, ANTI-SEMITE , A JEW -HATER etc.

 

brindel-back...... Based on your posts, I am sure that you brindel-back are going to call the educated Jews such as Benny Morris, Ilan Pappe, Avi Shlaim, Tom Segev, Baruch Kimmerling, Simha Flappan, and Joel Miqdal etc phony professors, charlatans, imposters , indoctrinated men, ANTI-SEMITE , A JEW -HATER etc. because they expose the Zionist deceit etc.

 

In other word, you are going to call the educated Jews A JEW-HATER! Are you insane?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
so, who is qualified?

 

An academically qualified historian whose field is relevant. But (just like Islam) if I wanted to know the best knowledge we had, I'd look at the consensus of the relevant scholars.

 

That is simply the only worthwhile source of information for us non-specialists. We can (indeed must) make up our own minds but let's do it on the basis of the best available information. The people who have that and who know about the debates and research are the relevant historians, not random ranters on the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mofre hysterical ranting from ###### .....nonsense and uneducated blather .

If you were to find a "scholar " who you would use to verify "Alice in Wonderland " , I would call him an imposter and imbecile , and so would the rest of the literary world .

That is exactly what you and yasnov are attempting to do , for not only does it show "your experts " to be fools and charlatans , and most likely anti-semites like yourselves , for there is NO OTHER REASON FOR SO TENCIOUSLY HOLDING ONTO AND CLINGING TO SUCH A THOTOUGHLY PROVEN FRAUDULENT DOCUMENT .

 

Unfortunately your position on this shows an abnormality in yourthinking anf logic , and most definitely a poor or defective education that you both must have recieved .

 

 

 

 

To NASHI :

 

 

Yes INDEED , QUALIFIED SCHOLARS-----THEIR GENERAL CONCENSUS----AND THE BEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION ...........AGREED !

 

 

BUt one must havea mind capable of disemination and discerning such information , and that mind in order to reach logical and empirical conclusions BASED ON FACT .........MUST BE FREE OF PREDISPOSED BIAS ANDHATRED .....a qualification that both ###### and Yasnov fail miserably at .

 

 

It is no wonder they hold so tightly to such an in-tenaciousand rdiculous position , in lightof the world body of verified knowledge .......i fact itis pathetic o watch .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An academically qualified historian whose field is relevant. But (just like Islam) if I wanted to know the best knowledge we had, I'd look at the consensus of the relevant scholars.

consensus of relevant scholars? didn't i ask you to give me 25 names of real scholars who said that the protocol is not real?

 

wassalam,

y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you bothered to even check the claim made earlier in this thread, that the Protocols is an obvious rewrite of an earlier piece of propaganda slandering entirely different people? If you haven't, how on earth can you claim to be a neutral observer? You haven't even attempted to produce any evidence.

 

I will find 25 scholars but it would be MUCH easier if you could name just one who thought the Protocols is real. I seriously doubt that many scholars bother to publish papers about the falsehood of the Protocols for the same reason that it would be difficult to find papers published by epidemiologists refuting the idea that swamp gas causes malaria (literally "bad air" - until relatively recently it was though that the swamps rather than the mosquitoes that lived in them were responsible for malaria).

 

It's simply not an issue any more - it is KNOWN that the Protocols is a fraud. I will probably have to go back to the time when the Protocols were first circulating to find the arguments and the papers proving them to be fraudulent, and that isn't easy on the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I will find 25 scholars but it would be MUCH easier if you could name just one who thought the Protocols is real.

so, can you or can't you?

 

wassalam,

y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said that I will, and I have said that it will take time. I gave reasons. In the meantime, why don't you find just one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow, it must take faith to rely on anonymous scholars of the past.

 

wassalam,

y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who said anything about anonymous? The various universities and their journals go back a long time. But most old journals are not available online (and it isn't easy to get even current journals online of you don't have access to a student subscription to the worldwide journal databases, which I don't).

 

As I've said twice now, it will take time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who said anything about anonymous? The various universities and their journals go back a long time. But most old journals are not available online (and it isn't easy to get even current journals online of you don't have access to a student subscription to the worldwide journal databases, which I don't).

this is what make it weird, it's been around for quite sometimes, and no journals available online ... i don't buy it

 

wassalam,

y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL! What don't you buy? Academic journals - and there are hundreds, probably thousands - have been published for hundreds of years. Until the advent of the internet they were sold to univeristy libraries at quite high prices, as they are expensive to produce and sell in relatively small numbers - to a limited field of experts.

 

Since the advent of the internet, university students have been able to access current issues of some journals, sometimes free, sometimes not, on the internet. Some journals or universities might have a programme of publishing back issues on the internet (I hope so) but it isn't common. Maybe it will become more common.

 

I assume that famous papers in old journals (eg Einstein's theory, the great bereakthroughs in chemisty, physics and medicine of the past 150 years, Levi Strauss, Freud, Rutherford and the many others geniuses) are reproduced online, but the ordinary everyday research isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL! What don't you buy? Academic journals - and there are hundreds, probably thousands - have been published for hundreds of years. Until the advent of the internet they were sold to univeristy libraries at quite high prices, as they are expensive to produce and sell in relatively small numbers - to a limited field of experts.

ok, give me the titles of the journals then

 

wassalam,

y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yasnov , just admit , you have not the education nor the power of reasoning to determine fact from fiction , or truth from fairey-tales .

 

You can dtermine the validity of a document or story in the same way you determine the difference between an historical fact and a childrens fable .

 

If you can't tell the difference , OR ....you are "unsure " as you like to put it , then to a person like you , it really makes no difference as you drift through life in and out of reality .

 

 

Trouble is many of your like-minded bretheren share the same delusion and perpetrate actions in reality based on your mutual false basis.

 

 

And you wanna know why no one listens to your complaints ?

 

C'mon Yasnov , YOU KNOW , That it is not JUST YOU who holds such views on the protocols , and the world seeing it, looks on that as a defective mind .

 

 

But hey if that's the way you like it so be it .....just don't whine or question why no one's on your side .....because this issue is merely just one of many, where the same irrationality is present .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

brindel-back is always coming back ... but never contribute anything to the topic at hand. don't blame him though ... especially for this topic.

 

wassalam,

y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But hey if that's the way you like it so be it .....just don't whine or question why no one's on your side .....

love this line :sl:

i assume you will stop bothering me with your irrelevant rants? thanks then, no more bandwidth waste.

*pat brindel-back on the back*

 

wassalam,

y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yasnov , do not try to disguise the simple facts :

 

 

You lost the argument ....The Protocols are false .

 

You failed to provide a legitimate scholar who would agree with youyr view that the Protocols are a valid document ...in fcat your "example " was an astronomer , but you blamed the BBC for that .

 

You lack the academic ability to determine if ANYTHING is true or false , becauser all the issues you bring up are based in your own ideological rhetoric , and facts and logic have no place in your arguments .

 

 

This latest diversionary tactic is typical of a man with no valid argument .

 

You are a bigot , therefire for that cause ONLY do you either insist the Protocols are valid or deceptively laim"you're not sure " .

 

 

Who you trying to kid Yasnov ?

 

 

 

How do you know that the childhood classic "Through the Looking Glass " is REAL FACT OR NOT ???

 

 

How do you base your conclusion ?

 

Well , Knowledge , education , common sense, logic, and savoir-faire would help you reach your conclusion , indeed the right conclusion .

 

You lack all of these , so any conclusion you reach regarding the Protocols based on "your criteria " are always patently false .....just like your conclusions on the moon landings , and the presence of the mirrors placed on the moon by US Astronauts .

 

The fault in your own reasoning process and lack of connective thought shines glaringly through all of your arguments .

So yasnov , do not try to turn the tables on me , you have already proven yourself inept , uneducated and incapable of any intellectual discussion .

 

 

 

Propaganda , and ideologicalrhetoric are your game ....nothing else .

 

 

In view of the widely , worldwide accepted conclusion by scholars , regarding the Protocols , puts the burden squarely on your shoulders to prove that they are REAL , and so far you AND ###### have failed miserably , only offering your personal feelings on zionism , which taints everything you say or do .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yasnov, as I've said there are thousands of journals. Why on earth do you want me to give you the titles? So you can believe that they exist? Here's a list of the Humanities journals published Oxford University (it literally took a 3 second google search to find these). Their science list would be longer. Many, many other universities publish journals. There are a lot of journals.

 

Adaptation

American Literary History

Applied Linguistics

The British Journal of Aesthetics

The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science

The Cambridge Quarterly

Christian Bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality

Contemporary Women's Writing

ELT Journal

Early Music

English: Journal of the English Association

The English Historical Review

Enterprise & Society: The International Journal of Business History

Essays in Criticism

Forum for Modern Language Studies

French History

French Studies

French Studies Bulletin

German History

History Workshop Journal

Holocaust and Genocide Studies

International Journal of Lexicography

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Journal of Design History

The Journal of Hindu Studies

Journal of the History of Collections

Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences

Journal of Islamic Studies

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine

Journal of the Royal Musical Association

Journal of Semantics

Journal of Semitic Studies

The Journal of Theological Studies

The Library

Literary Imagination

Literary and Linguistic Computing

Literature and Theology

Mind

Modern Judaism - A Journal of Jewish Ideas and Experience

Music and Letters

The Musical Quarterly

Notes and Queries

The Opera Quarterly

The Oral History Review

Oxford Art Journal

Past & Present

Philosophia Mathematica

Public Health Ethics

The Review of English Studies

Review of Finance

Screen

Social History of Medicine

Twentieth Century British History

The Year's Work in Critical and Cultural Theory

The Year's Work in English Studies

Services

View full list of journals

Online Archive

New to Oxford Journals in 2008: The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy. Click here to view a free online sample issue!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i still don't understand why you feel the urge to copy and paste something like "The Opera Quarterly" or "Philosophia Mathematica" in this thread?

 

wassalam,

y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because you asked me to list the titles of all the journals in the world. I gave you a list of just the Humanities journals currently published by just one university to give you an idea of how massive your request was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why on earth would i ask you to list the titles of all the journals in the world?

 

wassalam,

y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No idea. So what were you asking when you said "ok, give me the titles of the journals then"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

come on, nashi, read the title of this thread again

 

*yawn*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×