1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

You mean the Muslims weren't paranoid before it?

Reader comment on item: The "Shocking Document" that Shaped the Middle East Turns 100

Submitted by UNCLE VLADDI (Canada), May 9, 2016 at 23:57

The article says: "Sykes-Picot set the stage for the proliferation of a deeply consequential conspiracy-mentality that ever since has afflicted the region."

Okay, maybe, but the Qur'an itself tells muslims that lying to everyone all the time is a holy duty, and it also tells muslims that all the non-muslims in the world are even worse evil liars who are all out to get them, multiple times - especially the Jews.

REMEMBER: THE NATION OF ISRAEL DIDN'T EXIST ANY MORE WHEN MUHAMMAD WROTE HIS QUR'AN, which itself only refers to Israel as the God-given homeland of the Jewish people.

Don't forget: NO JEWS WERE "OCCUPYING ARAB LANDS" at the time Muhammad wrote his book!

The Qur'an puts forward a clear, consistent image of the Jews: they are scheming, treacherous liars and the most dangerous enemies of the Muslims.

This THEOLOGICAL TENET provides a basis for Islam's deeply-rooted anti-Semitism.

Regardless of the actions of British or Jews 100 years ago, or even of Jewish individuals today, and regardless of what policies the State of Israel currently follows, the Qur'an justifies an unrelenting form of anti-Semitism that will be extremely difficult to root out from the Muslim world.

For rather lengthy exposes about this theme, please see here:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/01/germany-muslims-screaming-jew-attack-and-rob-jewish-man

... and here:

http://pamelageller.com/islamic-antisemitism/

Also, this article claims (above) that:

"by London's having promised roughly this area to both the Arabs (in the McMahon-Hussein correspondence of January 1916) and the Zionists (in the Balfour declaration of November 1917). It appeared that London had not just sold the same territory twice but also double-crossed Arabs and Jews by arranging (in Sykes-Picot) itself to retain control over it."

Er ... no, not really. That statement's taking those agreements out of chronological order, isn't it?

First sentence in the article:

"The Sykes-Picot accord that has shaped and distorted the modern Middle East was signed one hundred years ago, on May 16, 1916."

SO THEN, THIS BIT: "London ... promised roughly this area to both the Arabs (in the McMahon-Hussein correspondence of January 1916)" ... a mere four months prior - MUST HAVE COME BEFORE THAT.

... and then this bit AFTER it:

"( London's having promised roughly this area to) the Zionists (in the Balfour declaration of November 1917)."

So the correct chronological order is: The British promised it to the Arabs, then changed their minds four months later and decided to keep it for themselves after all, and finally decided a full year and a half later after that, to give (or, more accurately, sell) it to the Jewish people.

AND ALL THE KINGS AND RULES OF ALL THE SURROUNDING ARAB NATIONS AGREED TO THE SALE, laughing up the sleeves of their robes at what suckers the Jews were to offer to pay them so much money for the land that was, at that time, nothing more or less than a literal garbage-dump.

So apparently the Arab rulers were perfectly OK with breaching the McMahon-Hussein deal for money.

Then along came Hitler and WWII, and worse: After Hitler's first plan to expel and expatriate all of the Jews in Germany BACK to their ancestral homelands in Israel, he was stopped and convinced instead to round them up and murder them all by his new best friend, the blond and blue-eyed Grand Mufti of 'palestine,' Haj-Amin al-Husseini, yasser Arafat's own uncle - who didn't want the Jews to be sent back to live in "HIS" territory!

So no, one cannot blame the 'perfidious' British or the 'perfidious' Jews for Middle Eastern tensions.
As it has been for the last 1,400+ years, the region's perpetual endemic violence clearly still derives from Muhammad's offensive "islam,"its bigoted Qur'an, and it's self-determined "muslim" gangsters.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Daniel Pipes replies:

I argue in my book Hidden Hand that modern Europeans introduced the conspiratorial mentality.

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to You mean the Muslims weren't paranoid before it? by UNCLE VLADDI

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2022 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)