The language of “humiliation” has been heard in Gaza this past week, with videos of defiant Palestinians chanting, “We prefer to die and not to be humiliated”.
Good analysis. All I would add is that Muslims are significantly more intolerant than most other cultural groups. There is very little live and let live with Muslim communities. In most Western nations they resist assimilation. In Britain the mosques specifically teach Muslims that what we think of as patriotism or national loyalty is a form of idolatry. It is Islam first before anything else.
This is strikingly different from other cultural groups moving to the West where their cohesiveness evaporates after a generation or two. Second and third generation Cantonese don't really feel they have much of a link with Hong Kong, for example, and rarely speak Cantonese.
A second factor is people from Asia hate losing face. We tend to associate this with the Far East; the inscrutable Japanese etc. It is in fact an Asian thing. Whites don't have this to the same extent. It is definitely present in Indians. They are deeply uncomfortable taking blame or responsibility if it involves a loss of face. In the UK many Muslims are Pakistani, so cut from the same cloth.
So I think the insult to Islam element of the formation of Israel is felt very deeply by Muslims in ways Europeans don't understand. Most of us don't care. It is ancient history. So we are baffled at the way the two-state solution always fails. But I suspect that history is processed quite differently by people who dislike losing face.
And for all of the discussion about diversity and multi-cultural understanding, especially at elite universities, many people just continue to assume that everyone is motivated by the same things they are - peace, prosperity, and individual autonomy. There's a world of people who value different things, some of which are in direct opposition to what most Americans value.
Yes absolutely. No one could read Heather Mac Donald's forensic investigation of the workings of DEI in American universities 'The Diversity Delusion' (which I reviewed here: https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/how-diversity-narrows-the-mind) and not come away from it feeling a large measure of skepticism about the real motivation behind much campus-type social justice protest.
Hard agree. Some of those groups will tell you to your face and publish it widely. To not understand this in the current era is an act of willful ignorance. Does anyone think Ilhan Omar loves America?
Good piece but I think you could have stressed a crucial aspect more-- Islam is a religion of conquest.
Muslims who have their ethnic/genetic roots in the Middle East share those notions of conquest and territorial supremacy. They think of themselves either consciously or unconsciously (mostly unconsciously) as descendants of the conquering population. This is hardly the way a Chinese Uighur Muslim ever would think of themselves.
As someone who lived in India I heard this second hand account of a local Hindu-Muslim controversy. A Muslim girl from the neighborhood was rumored to be in love with a Hindu boy. The first thing you hear Muslims typically say is that this has brought dishonor to the family and they have been humiliated.
Hindus also say they have been humiliated but they mean it in a slightly different way than Muslims do. The difference in the way these two groups use dishonor and humiliation is very subtle and easy to miss if you aren’t a keen observer.
Hindus mean it as a violation of casteism or religious sentiments and what they will have to say to their relatives should they hear about this. Muslims share these religious fears too. But the idea of humiliation is rooted in something deeper. The idea that their daughters and sons having to marry the descendants of people their ancestors (Mughals) had conquered is something Muslims feel. They are proud that their ancestors ruled over the Hindu population. Indian Muslims are poorer than the Hindus which only adds to the humiliation. They feel they’ve been dealt a bad hand by fate (the British empire) and they would have been ruling over the Hindu population if not for the dissolution of the Mughal empire.
Only dumb liberal westerners are riddled with guilt over their conquering ancestors. Third Worlders are very proud of it. I saw one leftist after another on Twitter being shocked at young Hamas terrorists taking attractive women as war booty back to be raped. Some even expressed doubts whether it even happened and some suggested this is a racist conspiracy theory. The Western liberal mind is unable to comprehend such primal behavior and they think it’s all just an ideological struggle against “oppression”.
Excellent observations. Especially the total misunderstanding of empires and conquest. I am aghast at how soft we have become. Here in Britain the media are constantly wringing their hands over the British Empire. They have no idea of the context or the deep currents that create such a thing. Most of the world understand better that life is strife, and some are a lot better at managing it than others.
Why is literally no one discussing the theological reasons why Islam wants to remove Jews from the face of the earth? Too spicy? Not that I care for either side in this fight. But at the end of the day Israel or no Israel, people like me (white Christian male) are regarded as little more than Kafir or Goyim and quietly despised by both Muslims and Jews. But such feelings are kept in check merely out of convenience. Just look at Sweden when Muslims coagulate in such number where they feel no repercussions will occur for their presence. Jews and Muslims hate each other and non believers alike. This will continue with or without Israel. Cave people should stay in caves.
No one discusses it here because our religion is liberalism. This blinds people to reality. The "Queers for Palestine" signs held up by the celebrants in capital cities illustrates the problem.
I have never heard of Jews attempting to eradicate goyim or looking down on them. In general, there aren’t enough Jews to have much of a society without Goyim, which is noticeably different from Islam.
This is further reinforced by the lack of conversion and conquest by Jews when compared to Islam.
Why is Islam still the fastest growing faith now. They have no swords at any bodies neck to “force conversions” . Which is a complete historical lie as is the myth of global domination. Nobody is going to dominate the globe . Not Rome not America or its puppet masters
I mean, they certainly do. In the Middle East, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia there are Muslim majority countries practicing some version of sharia law. In Europe, in the banlieus and no-go zones, it’s the same. In the areas of the US where Muslims have been concentrated they are rolling back American Civil Liberties, much to the surprise of local Democrats.
Generally, Islam offers a totalitarian security to the marginalized of society. This is why it is so popular among blacks and leftists in the West.
Anyway, my point is that Judaism is an inward facing culture that seeks to exclude others. That has been jts strength. Islam and Christianity are proselytizing religions that seek to expand, though Christianity has been largely neutered in the west.
Regardless, the notion that Islam does not have a bent towards domination is ridiculous. It’s been that way since the beginning. Ask Salman Rushdie or a Jew in the banlieu if there is a sword at the throat.
Point out from Islamic sources Qur’an and authentic Hadiths this myth of wiping out Jews and Judaism. Why are they still here? Jews have been in Islamic governments for centuries. You are sorely misinformed or just plain lying
Great. Someone tried to assassinate Mohammed. I guess all Christina’s should still butcher the Jews due to Jesus. Cave people should stay in their caves.
This simple explanation is the most insightful thing I've heard about the conflict, and I'm irked that I didn't think of it. Honor culture explains the paradox of Muslim expression of support for the Palestinians without matching actions, notably accepting Palestinian immigrants. Iran gives them money not out of compassion, but because they are a useful thorn in Israel's side.
I would add only that for Muslims in Western countries, the Palestinian cause is convenient for signaling, and loud support for Palestinians is a typical luxury belief.
What is the profile of this “ honor culture “ that covers the 49 Muslim majority counties across diverse languages and cultures? Where is your evidence from The Qur’an and authentic Hadith ( because Jews infected Hadiths with slander against Muhammad ( saws) since The Qur’an was protected). And have you cut open the heart of Muslims in the West to see what they believe. I’ll wait
"Several factors appear to be involved: Most Western countries are close allies of Israel but are not allies of China or Myanmar."
This is clearly not an important factor because the same massive anti-Israel rallies happen in countries like Indonesia or Pakistan which have little or no relations with Israel.
"Practically all the Muslims living in Western countries are from the MENA region."
Also clearly not an important factor because, again, Muslims in Indonesia and Pakistan are much more exercised about Israel than they are about Muslim issues closer to them (I'm inclined to say that Pakistani Muslims actually care about Israel more than Kashmir, but certainly they care more than they do about Uyghurs).
"And most significantly, the foundation of Israel and everything that has followed – particularly Israel’s continued control over the third holiest site in Islam – is seen as a humiliation that must be avenged."
I'm not sure this is very important factor. Did Muslims obsess less about Israel before 1948 when the whole of ancient Jerusalem was in Arab hands, Jews were banned from the Western Wall, and the old synagogues were used as latrines? Certainly, Arabs weren't any more chilled out on the subject, after all the PLO was founded in 1964 (clearly they knew in advance Israel was going to build settlements after 1967!).
**
In general I think this whole article is based on a category error. The overwhelming majority of people never form opinions. At most, they choose their ideological team for a certain reason and adopt a suite of opinions along with it, but most people don't even do that. This is all the more true for low IQ groups, and especially for those in a culture like Islam that is systematically inhospitable to any kind of critical thinking. So the simple answer why a given Muslims has opinion X is because other Muslims around him do. Thus you need to explain why those able to shape Muslim public opinion chose to focus on Israel. This is really a historical question, and has to do mostly with the coincidence of political/revivalist Islam growing alongside Zionism, as well as imperial, and then, Cold War, politics.
It's an interesting and valuable perspective, but the question I ask is, could this perspective not be falling into the Orientalizing trap?
Most people do not like having land taken from them. Palestinians' neighbors are linked to them via ethnicity and language (Arabs), and religion, with Islam being much more of a cement than Christianity has been for Europe in centuries to boot. France was seething over the loss of Alsace-Lorraine for almost two generations before getting it back, there's vivid descriptions of the intensity of that feeling in the prewar era (indeed, that is where the term revanchism originally comes from).
I'm unsure you need honor culture on top of that to explain anything. Honor culture would have more of an influence on the layer of personal and clan relationships as opposed to relationships between peoples and states, and Islam in particular is rather at odds with honor culture in principle (the article mentions honor killings in passing, but these are not Islamic practices, but indigenous cultural ones that are opposed by any orthodox reading of Islam).
Good article. I think it's also important to note the extent to which Islam is an Arab supremacist movement. Despite making up a minority of global Muslims, Middle Eastern Arabs dominate Islam culturally and institutionally. Muslims care more about what happens to Palestinians partly because they are Arabs rather than Bengalis or Turkics.
I would guess this is a product of the oppressor-victim mentality prevalent on the Left.
The Palestinians are very much understood as an oppressed minority amputated from their rightful homeland. They are also poor which helps the narrative.
By comparison the obvious sophistication of the Israelis, their wealth and above all their backing by the US, make them easy to pitch as wealthy oppressors whose refusal to share land can be seen as selfishness rather than a cultural clash.
There was a lot of innuendo and anecdote in your article. Who appointed Osama as spokesman for the Muslim world?
Muslims care because it’s grand theft larceny of a Muslim holy site. The Palestinians are its custodians and they have been and are oppressed Qur’an 2:217 Oppression is worst than slaughter
I believe that’s what The American revolution was about.
Here is an American Muslim spokesperson on the issue
CLAIMING DIVINE RIGHT TO LAND
QUESTION: But don't the Israelis claim that the land is theirs by Divine right?
IMAM W DEEN MOHAMMED: Yes, the Israelis claim that G’d gave them that land. What I'm saying is that that is an argument which shouldn't be admitted into that situation at all. I think the issue can be settled when the Israelis can get rid of that kind of sensitivity and not claim any divine right to the land, and give everybody their due right — that was the Palestinians' homeland — and the Palestinians can also look at the Israelis, who have been there for hundreds of years, maybe thousands, and say to each other that you have a right to be here.
But this political desire and military machinery has to go. Then I think the people could come together and agree on living with each other and coming under a form that would allow all of them freedom and opportunity.
The Zionist militarist organization, which desires to build a power base in the Middle East, complicates the situation. Those who want to dominate the land are not sincere when they say all they want is their land. What they really want is to dominate the land. They feel they are special people and feel they are more qualified to be responsible for the Middle East than the Arabs are, who are in the great majority.
By: Imam W Deen Mohammed son of Elijah Muhammad
ps as an insider All of the mention repression of Muslim populations are responded to by Muslims
There’s a website called Religion of Peace . com, which I think answers that question pretty well (no). They’ve been around since 9/11 (or before, I’m not sure), and basically document daily worldwide violence in the name of Islam.
That website is an attempted slander against Al Islam from start to finish. All critique’s of Al Islam should start with its sources, The Quran’s The life of prophet Muhammad ( saws) not miscreants. Before criticizing The Qur’an at least read it. My Goodness!
All they do is document things which have actually happened, and you can verify them elsewhere and draw your own conclusions based on what people actually do, not on what they say.
30,000 plus people mainly women and children have been killed by zionists. They have been prosecuted in the international criminal court. Millions are homeless and starving and the bombing continues. And you want to attemp to educate me about a hater website. What if somebody documents the daily violence and mass shootings in America whose name is that done it ?
But you're pointing to and anti Islamic probably Zionists run website that "documents violence in the name of Islam" Who is issuing these orders ? and where is the headquarter? https://x.com/malcom_sc/status/1741215368876585032?s=46
Okay. How do you then explain Muhammad conquering people which involved killing? How do you then explain Muhammad ordering the execution of the poet who mocked him (like Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf)? Why did Muhammad say "Whoever changes his religion, kill him." (several hadiths).
Was Muhammad a moral entity? If you say yes, what's your explaination for Muhammad having slaves including sexual slaves?
Qur'an 68:4 "And verily you( Muhammad) are on an exalted standard of character." Should you do an objective study of his life. You will have a basis for criticism . You comments sound to me like they came straight from an Islamaphobic hate site.
Any hadiths that are not supported by Qu'ran are rejected prima facie. Hadith alone are not Islamically binding. Additionaly hadith are to be understood in context of time, place, who it was addressed to . to an individual, group, a leader, a regular person etc. And still must have a Quranic foundation. All of the allusions you have mentioned do not. What reputable biography of the Prophet Muhammad have you read to come to your conclusions? I suggest Muhammad by Haykal or The Life of Muhammad Based on The Earliest Sources by Martin Lings. Would you go to your Uncle's enemy to investigate his history with the family ?
Now Why did America spend $30 billion dollars and gather the top " intellects" and spend 5 years to create a bomb purposely designed to kill civilians then drop it on two civilian cities which decapitated the head of babies and worst of some 250 million people( civilians)? That's a quarter of a billion
Does that sound like people who are really concerned about civilian casualties ?
Good analysis. What I would add is that the humiliation doesn't only stem from the control of Al Aqsa: remember that between 1948 and 1967, Israel didn't control the Old City of Jerusalem and Muslim opposition against the existence of Israel wasn't less. When Nasser said “What was taken by force can only be retrieved by force.”, he probably meant pre-1967 Israel, which he set out to destroy in May 1967. The main humiliation stems from having a formerly "Dhimmi" (protected but subjugated minority) people becoming a dominant majority in a small portion of the heartland of Islam. Sadly, nothing that Israel does, no amount of territory it relinquishes, will change that.
Good analysis. All I would add is that Muslims are significantly more intolerant than most other cultural groups. There is very little live and let live with Muslim communities. In most Western nations they resist assimilation. In Britain the mosques specifically teach Muslims that what we think of as patriotism or national loyalty is a form of idolatry. It is Islam first before anything else.
This is strikingly different from other cultural groups moving to the West where their cohesiveness evaporates after a generation or two. Second and third generation Cantonese don't really feel they have much of a link with Hong Kong, for example, and rarely speak Cantonese.
A second factor is people from Asia hate losing face. We tend to associate this with the Far East; the inscrutable Japanese etc. It is in fact an Asian thing. Whites don't have this to the same extent. It is definitely present in Indians. They are deeply uncomfortable taking blame or responsibility if it involves a loss of face. In the UK many Muslims are Pakistani, so cut from the same cloth.
So I think the insult to Islam element of the formation of Israel is felt very deeply by Muslims in ways Europeans don't understand. Most of us don't care. It is ancient history. So we are baffled at the way the two-state solution always fails. But I suspect that history is processed quite differently by people who dislike losing face.
Actual insight. Thank you.
And for all of the discussion about diversity and multi-cultural understanding, especially at elite universities, many people just continue to assume that everyone is motivated by the same things they are - peace, prosperity, and individual autonomy. There's a world of people who value different things, some of which are in direct opposition to what most Americans value.
Yes absolutely. No one could read Heather Mac Donald's forensic investigation of the workings of DEI in American universities 'The Diversity Delusion' (which I reviewed here: https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/how-diversity-narrows-the-mind) and not come away from it feeling a large measure of skepticism about the real motivation behind much campus-type social justice protest.
Hard agree. Some of those groups will tell you to your face and publish it widely. To not understand this in the current era is an act of willful ignorance. Does anyone think Ilhan Omar loves America?
Good piece but I think you could have stressed a crucial aspect more-- Islam is a religion of conquest.
Muslims who have their ethnic/genetic roots in the Middle East share those notions of conquest and territorial supremacy. They think of themselves either consciously or unconsciously (mostly unconsciously) as descendants of the conquering population. This is hardly the way a Chinese Uighur Muslim ever would think of themselves.
As someone who lived in India I heard this second hand account of a local Hindu-Muslim controversy. A Muslim girl from the neighborhood was rumored to be in love with a Hindu boy. The first thing you hear Muslims typically say is that this has brought dishonor to the family and they have been humiliated.
Hindus also say they have been humiliated but they mean it in a slightly different way than Muslims do. The difference in the way these two groups use dishonor and humiliation is very subtle and easy to miss if you aren’t a keen observer.
Hindus mean it as a violation of casteism or religious sentiments and what they will have to say to their relatives should they hear about this. Muslims share these religious fears too. But the idea of humiliation is rooted in something deeper. The idea that their daughters and sons having to marry the descendants of people their ancestors (Mughals) had conquered is something Muslims feel. They are proud that their ancestors ruled over the Hindu population. Indian Muslims are poorer than the Hindus which only adds to the humiliation. They feel they’ve been dealt a bad hand by fate (the British empire) and they would have been ruling over the Hindu population if not for the dissolution of the Mughal empire.
Only dumb liberal westerners are riddled with guilt over their conquering ancestors. Third Worlders are very proud of it. I saw one leftist after another on Twitter being shocked at young Hamas terrorists taking attractive women as war booty back to be raped. Some even expressed doubts whether it even happened and some suggested this is a racist conspiracy theory. The Western liberal mind is unable to comprehend such primal behavior and they think it’s all just an ideological struggle against “oppression”.
Excellent observations. Especially the total misunderstanding of empires and conquest. I am aghast at how soft we have become. Here in Britain the media are constantly wringing their hands over the British Empire. They have no idea of the context or the deep currents that create such a thing. Most of the world understand better that life is strife, and some are a lot better at managing it than others.
Why is literally no one discussing the theological reasons why Islam wants to remove Jews from the face of the earth? Too spicy? Not that I care for either side in this fight. But at the end of the day Israel or no Israel, people like me (white Christian male) are regarded as little more than Kafir or Goyim and quietly despised by both Muslims and Jews. But such feelings are kept in check merely out of convenience. Just look at Sweden when Muslims coagulate in such number where they feel no repercussions will occur for their presence. Jews and Muslims hate each other and non believers alike. This will continue with or without Israel. Cave people should stay in caves.
No one discusses it here because our religion is liberalism. This blinds people to reality. The "Queers for Palestine" signs held up by the celebrants in capital cities illustrates the problem.
I have never heard of Jews attempting to eradicate goyim or looking down on them. In general, there aren’t enough Jews to have much of a society without Goyim, which is noticeably different from Islam.
This is further reinforced by the lack of conversion and conquest by Jews when compared to Islam.
Why is Islam still the fastest growing faith now. They have no swords at any bodies neck to “force conversions” . Which is a complete historical lie as is the myth of global domination. Nobody is going to dominate the globe . Not Rome not America or its puppet masters
I mean, they certainly do. In the Middle East, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia there are Muslim majority countries practicing some version of sharia law. In Europe, in the banlieus and no-go zones, it’s the same. In the areas of the US where Muslims have been concentrated they are rolling back American Civil Liberties, much to the surprise of local Democrats.
Generally, Islam offers a totalitarian security to the marginalized of society. This is why it is so popular among blacks and leftists in the West.
Anyway, my point is that Judaism is an inward facing culture that seeks to exclude others. That has been jts strength. Islam and Christianity are proselytizing religions that seek to expand, though Christianity has been largely neutered in the west.
Regardless, the notion that Islam does not have a bent towards domination is ridiculous. It’s been that way since the beginning. Ask Salman Rushdie or a Jew in the banlieu if there is a sword at the throat.
https://youtube.com/shorts/dD9b4aZP2pk?si=wi3acG6k9PFAYlA9
Where is the “ no go zone in America ? That sir or Madame is a case for loud laughter. Christianity has neutered itself.
https://apple.news/AUSAoZxQFT8uYt9N9Ed8TOQ
All the rest of that mumbo jumbo needs to be put in the shelf with the elf.
> Why is literally no one discussing the theological reasons why Islam wants to remove Jews from the face of the earth?
There has been a taboo in the West against theological reasons for foreign policy since the Thirty Years War.
Point out from Islamic sources Qur’an and authentic Hadiths this myth of wiping out Jews and Judaism. Why are they still here? Jews have been in Islamic governments for centuries. You are sorely misinformed or just plain lying
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaynab_bint_Al-Harith?wprov=sfti1#
Great. Someone tried to assassinate Mohammed. I guess all Christina’s should still butcher the Jews due to Jesus. Cave people should stay in their caves.
I don’t believe that horseshit, but it’s just as ludicrous as Jews claiming they own Palestine because of their fairytales too
This simple explanation is the most insightful thing I've heard about the conflict, and I'm irked that I didn't think of it. Honor culture explains the paradox of Muslim expression of support for the Palestinians without matching actions, notably accepting Palestinian immigrants. Iran gives them money not out of compassion, but because they are a useful thorn in Israel's side.
I would add only that for Muslims in Western countries, the Palestinian cause is convenient for signaling, and loud support for Palestinians is a typical luxury belief.
What is the profile of this “ honor culture “ that covers the 49 Muslim majority counties across diverse languages and cultures? Where is your evidence from The Qur’an and authentic Hadith ( because Jews infected Hadiths with slander against Muhammad ( saws) since The Qur’an was protected). And have you cut open the heart of Muslims in the West to see what they believe. I’ll wait
"Several factors appear to be involved: Most Western countries are close allies of Israel but are not allies of China or Myanmar."
This is clearly not an important factor because the same massive anti-Israel rallies happen in countries like Indonesia or Pakistan which have little or no relations with Israel.
"Practically all the Muslims living in Western countries are from the MENA region."
Also clearly not an important factor because, again, Muslims in Indonesia and Pakistan are much more exercised about Israel than they are about Muslim issues closer to them (I'm inclined to say that Pakistani Muslims actually care about Israel more than Kashmir, but certainly they care more than they do about Uyghurs).
"And most significantly, the foundation of Israel and everything that has followed – particularly Israel’s continued control over the third holiest site in Islam – is seen as a humiliation that must be avenged."
I'm not sure this is very important factor. Did Muslims obsess less about Israel before 1948 when the whole of ancient Jerusalem was in Arab hands, Jews were banned from the Western Wall, and the old synagogues were used as latrines? Certainly, Arabs weren't any more chilled out on the subject, after all the PLO was founded in 1964 (clearly they knew in advance Israel was going to build settlements after 1967!).
**
In general I think this whole article is based on a category error. The overwhelming majority of people never form opinions. At most, they choose their ideological team for a certain reason and adopt a suite of opinions along with it, but most people don't even do that. This is all the more true for low IQ groups, and especially for those in a culture like Islam that is systematically inhospitable to any kind of critical thinking. So the simple answer why a given Muslims has opinion X is because other Muslims around him do. Thus you need to explain why those able to shape Muslim public opinion chose to focus on Israel. This is really a historical question, and has to do mostly with the coincidence of political/revivalist Islam growing alongside Zionism, as well as imperial, and then, Cold War, politics.
Sounds like you’re in a good position to write a piece on this thesis.
It's an interesting and valuable perspective, but the question I ask is, could this perspective not be falling into the Orientalizing trap?
Most people do not like having land taken from them. Palestinians' neighbors are linked to them via ethnicity and language (Arabs), and religion, with Islam being much more of a cement than Christianity has been for Europe in centuries to boot. France was seething over the loss of Alsace-Lorraine for almost two generations before getting it back, there's vivid descriptions of the intensity of that feeling in the prewar era (indeed, that is where the term revanchism originally comes from).
I'm unsure you need honor culture on top of that to explain anything. Honor culture would have more of an influence on the layer of personal and clan relationships as opposed to relationships between peoples and states, and Islam in particular is rather at odds with honor culture in principle (the article mentions honor killings in passing, but these are not Islamic practices, but indigenous cultural ones that are opposed by any orthodox reading of Islam).
Noah, why do you say practically all Muslims in Western countries are from MENA countries? Pakistanis and Bangladeshis surely aren't.
Good article. I think it's also important to note the extent to which Islam is an Arab supremacist movement. Despite making up a minority of global Muslims, Middle Eastern Arabs dominate Islam culturally and institutionally. Muslims care more about what happens to Palestinians partly because they are Arabs rather than Bengalis or Turkics.
Very interesting. Thank you. Is there any work done on why non-Muslims care so much about Palestine?
I would guess this is a product of the oppressor-victim mentality prevalent on the Left.
The Palestinians are very much understood as an oppressed minority amputated from their rightful homeland. They are also poor which helps the narrative.
By comparison the obvious sophistication of the Israelis, their wealth and above all their backing by the US, make them easy to pitch as wealthy oppressors whose refusal to share land can be seen as selfishness rather than a cultural clash.
I suspect you are correct, but I wondered if the same sort if analysis as Noah has done regarding Muslims has been done in respect of non-Muslims.
Jerusalem in the Quran
Book by Imran N. Hosein
There was a lot of innuendo and anecdote in your article. Who appointed Osama as spokesman for the Muslim world?
Muslims care because it’s grand theft larceny of a Muslim holy site. The Palestinians are its custodians and they have been and are oppressed Qur’an 2:217 Oppression is worst than slaughter
I believe that’s what The American revolution was about.
Here is an American Muslim spokesperson on the issue
CLAIMING DIVINE RIGHT TO LAND
QUESTION: But don't the Israelis claim that the land is theirs by Divine right?
IMAM W DEEN MOHAMMED: Yes, the Israelis claim that G’d gave them that land. What I'm saying is that that is an argument which shouldn't be admitted into that situation at all. I think the issue can be settled when the Israelis can get rid of that kind of sensitivity and not claim any divine right to the land, and give everybody their due right — that was the Palestinians' homeland — and the Palestinians can also look at the Israelis, who have been there for hundreds of years, maybe thousands, and say to each other that you have a right to be here.
But this political desire and military machinery has to go. Then I think the people could come together and agree on living with each other and coming under a form that would allow all of them freedom and opportunity.
The Zionist militarist organization, which desires to build a power base in the Middle East, complicates the situation. Those who want to dominate the land are not sincere when they say all they want is their land. What they really want is to dominate the land. They feel they are special people and feel they are more qualified to be responsible for the Middle East than the Arabs are, who are in the great majority.
By: Imam W Deen Mohammed son of Elijah Muhammad
ps as an insider All of the mention repression of Muslim populations are responded to by Muslims
Genuine question: Do you think Islam is a religion of peace?
There’s a website called Religion of Peace . com, which I think answers that question pretty well (no). They’ve been around since 9/11 (or before, I’m not sure), and basically document daily worldwide violence in the name of Islam.
That website is an attempted slander against Al Islam from start to finish. All critique’s of Al Islam should start with its sources, The Quran’s The life of prophet Muhammad ( saws) not miscreants. Before criticizing The Qur’an at least read it. My Goodness!
All they do is document things which have actually happened, and you can verify them elsewhere and draw your own conclusions based on what people actually do, not on what they say.
30,000 plus people mainly women and children have been killed by zionists. They have been prosecuted in the international criminal court. Millions are homeless and starving and the bombing continues. And you want to attemp to educate me about a hater website. What if somebody documents the daily violence and mass shootings in America whose name is that done it ?
Also, I'm not criticizing the Qur'an. I'm criticizing people and the things they do.
But you're pointing to and anti Islamic probably Zionists run website that "documents violence in the name of Islam" Who is issuing these orders ? and where is the headquarter? https://x.com/malcom_sc/status/1741215368876585032?s=46
Yes
Okay. How do you then explain Muhammad conquering people which involved killing? How do you then explain Muhammad ordering the execution of the poet who mocked him (like Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf)? Why did Muhammad say "Whoever changes his religion, kill him." (several hadiths).
Was Muhammad a moral entity? If you say yes, what's your explaination for Muhammad having slaves including sexual slaves?
Qur'an 68:4 "And verily you( Muhammad) are on an exalted standard of character." Should you do an objective study of his life. You will have a basis for criticism . You comments sound to me like they came straight from an Islamaphobic hate site.
Any hadiths that are not supported by Qu'ran are rejected prima facie. Hadith alone are not Islamically binding. Additionaly hadith are to be understood in context of time, place, who it was addressed to . to an individual, group, a leader, a regular person etc. And still must have a Quranic foundation. All of the allusions you have mentioned do not. What reputable biography of the Prophet Muhammad have you read to come to your conclusions? I suggest Muhammad by Haykal or The Life of Muhammad Based on The Earliest Sources by Martin Lings. Would you go to your Uncle's enemy to investigate his history with the family ?
Now Why did America spend $30 billion dollars and gather the top " intellects" and spend 5 years to create a bomb purposely designed to kill civilians then drop it on two civilian cities which decapitated the head of babies and worst of some 250 million people( civilians)? That's a quarter of a billion
Does that sound like people who are really concerned about civilian casualties ?
What people don't understand about that phrase, is that even Bush, when he said it, meant for it to be aspirational.
Good analysis. What I would add is that the humiliation doesn't only stem from the control of Al Aqsa: remember that between 1948 and 1967, Israel didn't control the Old City of Jerusalem and Muslim opposition against the existence of Israel wasn't less. When Nasser said “What was taken by force can only be retrieved by force.”, he probably meant pre-1967 Israel, which he set out to destroy in May 1967. The main humiliation stems from having a formerly "Dhimmi" (protected but subjugated minority) people becoming a dominant majority in a small portion of the heartland of Islam. Sadly, nothing that Israel does, no amount of territory it relinquishes, will change that.
Echoes of the false choice that went:
"Better Red than Dead"