any arabs on sdn??

[Hook17]

---

Members do not see this ad.

i personally like hasi hellani, nawal, amr diab just brings back high school memories, and abdal halim even though i dont really understand most of the words

 

[nimer1456]

Seriously...the Qalqiliya zoo is really cool. The only problem i found was going at the right time of the day so the animals are active. I usually visit in the summer so its hard to see them active during the middle of the summer days. Still though I had some good times there.

It was pretty fun. I was there while they were feeding the Hippo so I got to see her eat... that was kind of fun. A lot of the cats were sleeping though, it was just a little too warm for them.

 

[freesolo]

wasnt najwa karam in dallas a month ago? Anyone go?

 

[iraqiamerican]

habibi is the equivalence of baby 😀

Michican... Dearborn to be exact. Crazy number of Arabs there. Chicago area has a good population as well.

Exactly. I would think Wayne State would have the most arab students since Detroit-area is where most arabs are in U.S.

I personally think that there's no one like Amr Diab and Mohamed Mounir. I also love Abu Wadee3, George Wassouf.

Amr Diab is a 35-year old Ricky Martin! He needs to quit soon!!

wasnt najwa karam in dallas a month ago? Anyone go?

Yes she was touring North America with Kathem Saher. Kathem made the show good! 😛

 

[freesolo]

habibi is the equivalence of baby 😀

Exactly. I would think Wayne State would have the most arab students since Detroit-area is where most arabs are in U.S.

Amr Diab is a 35-year old Ricky Martin! He needs to quit soon!!

Yes she was touring North America with Kathem Saher. Kathem made the show good! 😛

It seems like dallas area has lot of arabs too, at least alot bigger than here

 

[tigress]

i hear yeshiva univ looks favorably on palestinians in particular

hey, don't hate...please 😳
(btw, there are Arabs there, just Jewish ones...and many many Persans as well; there are also people with many different political opinions)

I heard that in Dearborn, Michigan (which somebody mentioned above) there are so many Muslims that the local school district decided to stop serving any pork products in school lunches. Pretty cool.

"yalla" has also been adopted in modern Hebrew, too...actually a ton of the slang in modern Hebrew comes from Arabic. I really want to learn Arabic someday.

This is out of left field, but have any of y'all read Dune? I just finished it. The author uses a lot of Arabic-derived (and a few Hebrew-derived, although in some ways the languages are close so it's hard to tell what he was using) words, and adapts a lot from Bedouin culture.

 

[Hook17]

No i havent read dune though i've heard its good. I heard those dearborn arabs are crazy. yea we've also adopted the hebrew word mahsoom, it means checkpoint.

 

[BaylorGuy]

hey, don't hate...please 😳
(btw, there are Arabs there, just Jewish ones...and many many Persans as well; there are also people with many different political opinions)

I heard that in Dearborn, Michigan (which somebody mentioned above) there are so many Muslims that the local school district decided to stop serving any pork products in school lunches. Pretty cool.

"yalla" has also been adopted in modern Hebrew, too...actually a ton of the slang in modern Hebrew comes from Arabic. I really want to learn Arabic someday.

This is out of left field, but have any of y'all read Dune? I just finished it. The author uses a lot of Arabic-derived (and a few Hebrew-derived, although in some ways the languages are close so it's hard to tell what he was using) words, and adapts a lot from Bedouin culture.

Well then, lets hope Yeshiva likes me and everyone else who applied there. It sounds like a really good school and for some reason i'm really attracted to it. weird.

I've been wanting to learn Hebrew...i picked up some while spending time in Palestine, but nothing that could keep me afloat in Israel. Luckily for me, a lot of the israelis also spoke arabic and english.

 

[Hook17]

dude i looked at your md profile from last year why do you think you got rejected from many schools post-secondary. I can't understand why they would. If you got waitlisted from ohio state, you shouldnt have been rejected from all those other places.

 

[wendywellesley]

No i havent read dune though i've heard its good. I heard those dearborn arabs are crazy. yea we've also adopted the hebrew word mahsoom, it means checkpoint.

not surprising 🙄

 

[tigress]

Well then, lets hope Yeshiva likes me and everyone else who applied there. It sounds like a really good school and for some reason i'm really attracted to it. weird.

I've been wanting to learn Hebrew...i picked up some while spending time in Palestine, but nothing that could keep me afloat in Israel. Luckily for me, a lot of the israelis also spoke arabic and english.

oh yeah, I was really talking about the undergrad. AECOM has Muslim students, for sure. There's no bias in their admissions.

Is there a good way to learn to read Arabic? Would it be easier for me to learn if I already know Hebrew (like how it's easier to learn Portugeuse or Italian if you know Spanish)? The writing looks like squiggles to me, but I'm sure that's how any language looks to somebody who doesn't know it.

Hook17, why are the Dearborn Arabs crazy?

 

[Hook17]

because only a fool would want to live surrounded by arabs

 

[tigress]

not surprising 🙄

yeah, just like many of the adopted Arabic words in Hebrew have to do with bombs or explosions 🙁

if I could fix the whole world I would, but I can't, so my only solution is to be friendly to as many people in it as I can 😎 (I think this is a cry for peace, and certainly within this forum...let's just dig each other's diversity)

 

[Hook17]

lol i didnt mean anything by it tigress, i like to joke alot.

 

[Flopotomist]

because only a fool would want to live surrounded by arabs

Wow. If I have learned nothing from SDN, it is that bigotry, racism, homophobia, sexism, xenophobia, and social ignorance know no boundaries. It is truly shameful that people like this are in the applicant pool for positions in medical school, and I can only hope that these types of people write honestly on their secondaries about their feelings towards other groups so that schools can choose to exclude them from becoming care providers.

 

[tigress]

lol i didnt mean anything by it tigress, i like to joke alot.

no, I know, no offense taken
I think it was a pre-emptive strike 😛

 

[Hook17]

Wow. If I have learned nothing from SDN, it is that bigotry, racism, homophobia, sexism, xenophobia, and social ignorance know no boundaries. It is truly shameful that people like this are in the applicant pool for positions in medical school, and I can only hope that these types of people write honestly on their secondaries about their feelings towards other groups so that schools can choose to exclude them from becoming care providers.

do you want the nobel peace prize?

 

[tigress]

Wow. If I have learned nothing from SDN, it is that bigotry, racism, homophobia, sexism, xenophobia, and social ignorance know no boundaries. It is truly shameful that people like this are in the applicant pool for positions in medical school, and I can only hope that these types of people write honestly on their secondaries about their feelings towards other groups so that schools can choose to exclude them from becoming care providers.

but isn't Hook an Arab? I think he was joking...

 

[Hook17]

no, I know, no offense taken
I think it was a pre-emptive strike 😛

i can hear the apaches now

 

[Flopotomist]

Is there a good way to learn to read Arabic? Would it be easier for me to learn if I already know Hebrew (like how it's easier to learn Portugeuse or Italian if you know Spanish)? The writing looks like squiggles to me, but I'm sure that's how any language looks to somebody who doesn't know it.

Hebrew won't help you learn how to read Arabic, nor will it make it easier. The writing is totally different, and the origins are different (unlike Romance languages like Italian and Spanish which share a similar origin). It is not too hard to learn to read it though, I did it, so anybody can!

 

[Flopotomist]

but isn't Hook an Arab? I think he was joking...

If he was joking, it wasn't funny. Under the current administration, anti-arab (and anti-Muslim) zeal has been used to enflame the populace to support a number of ridiculous positions. Arabs and those of us who have experienced the culture must stand up and defend against statements like the one that Hook made, joking or not.

 

[tigress]

Hebrew won't help you learn how to read Arabic, nor will it make it easier. The writing is totally different, and the origins are different (unlike Romance languages like Italian and Spanish which share a similar origin). It is not too hard to learn to read it though, I did it, so anybody can!

right, but some of the words are similar, right? so maybe it will help me learn the language faster

in any case it's not like I have time right now to learn Arabic...well, maybe I do, in this year before I start med school. I'm going to work on my Spanish (it used to be so good but now I've lost much of it), so I may go ahead and pick up some Arabic learning materials as well 🙂

 

[wendywellesley]

Hebrew won't help you learn how to read Arabic, nor will it make it easier. The writing is totally different, and the origins are different (unlike Romance languages like Italian and Spanish which share a similar origin). It is not too hard to learn to read it though, I did it, so anybody can!

this is SO not true (well, in my opinion atleast)!! I knew some very basic hebrew when I started learning arabic and i think it gave me a leg up over those who didn't have any frame of reference. the counting is VERY similar as is the alphabet. hebrew script does look similar to arabic and a lot of words over lap. the grammar structure is also very very similar.
plus they DO have the same origins!! they are both semitic languages.

flopo- i completely agree with you on your statemt about hook's comment.

 

[Hook17]

whats up with you people? Oh and by the way I think other arabs may understand the humor. This is not that serious. Its no justification for another invasion, I mean we're not talking about WMDs here.

 

[LJDHC05]

I'm not an Arab technically under the standards of AAMC, though I am "Black Irish" meaning that I get stopped at customs when I fly and people think that I'm more related to my egyptian best friend than to my fair skinned irish-polish-scottish biological brothers. I've also had spanish people come up to me and rattle off something in Castillian about me watching their luggage in Madrid at 4AM (I caught the words please and luggage and that's about it).

 

[BaylorGuy]

Hebrew won't help you learn how to read Arabic, nor will it make it easier. The writing is totally different, and the origins are different (unlike Romance languages like Italian and Spanish which share a similar origin). It is not too hard to learn to read it though, I did it, so anybody can!

Yeah, i'm gonna have to call you out on this one too. Both are semitic languages derived from the ancestors of Shem. Numbering is the same, way they are read and written is the same (right to left), accent marks are used to define the tonality of letters/words. Not to mention the placement in the body of where the majority of sounds are resonanted. Both languages use the mid-mouth and gutteral regions to produce sounds. Come on now.

What is interesting is the use of the word "anti-semitic." Technically it refers to being against those who are descended from Shem...meaning Jews, Christians, Muslims, arabs, phoenicians, etc. While now, it has a whole different meaning. What do i know though, pretty much every word has lost its true meaning.

 

[Rocket3004]

Well, sure the words are similar, and the orgins too, but they are totally different languages. I mean, I can read/write arabic but I cannot communicate to someone who speaks hebrew.

You would have much better luck speaking arabic to a farsi or urdu speaking person more so than a hebrew speaking person.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

Well, sure the words are similar, and the orgins too, but they are totally different languages. I mean, I can read/write arabic but I cannot communicate to someone who speaks hebrew.

You would have much better luck speaking arabic to a farsi or urdu speaking person more so than a hebrew speaking person.

That's silly. A Spaniard cannot understand a Romanian, but that doesn't mean that they are not both Romance languages!

As for the farsi/urdu being closer to Arabic, I find that bizarre, since Farsi and Urdu are Indo-European, and Hebrew is Semitic. I have heard Hindi and Farsi, and I can definitely tell you that they sound nothing like either Hebrew or Arabic. In contrast, I've heard both Hebrew and Arabic and oftentimes cannot tell the two apart, the sounds are so similar.

 

[wendywellesley]

That's silly. A Spaniard cannot understand a Romanian, but that doesn't mean that they are not both Romance languages!

As for the farsi/urdu being closer to Arabic, I find that bizarre, since Farsi and Urdu are Indo-European, and Hebrew is Semitic. I have heard Hindi and Farsi, and I can definitely tell you that they sound nothing like either Hebrew or Arabic. In contrast, I've heard both Hebrew and Arabic and oftentimes cannot tell the two apart, the sounds are so similar.

yeah, i agree with you. Farsi comes from a whole different root, it isn't a semetic language as is Hebrew and Arabic. And Iranians aren't Arabs!

I'm surprised that many people are trying to argue that Hebrew and Arabic are so distantly related, that is so far from the truth.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

yeah, i agree with you. Farsi comes from a whole different root, it isn't a semetic language as is Hebrew and Arabic. And Iranians aren't Arabs!

I'm surprised that many people are trying to argue that Hebrew and Arabic are so distantly related, that is so far from the truth.

Yeah, I just know a phrase or a word or two, but note the similarity:

Shalom Aleichem = Salaam Aleikum

Allah = Eloh

etc.

 

[Flopotomist]

yeah, i agree with you. Farsi comes from a whole different root, it isn't a semetic language as is Hebrew and Arabic. And Iranians aren't Arabs!

I'm surprised that many people are trying to argue that Hebrew and Arabic are so distantly related, that is so far from the truth.

I stand corrected - I am not a linguist. I googled it, and indeed, you are all right, and I was wrong, Hewbrew and Arabic (and Tigrinya) are all Semetic languages, so perhaps learning Arabic if you already speak Hebrew would be relatively easier. I don't think it was too hard though, and I only spoke English when I studied it. Interesting that Farsi uses the same alphabet as Arabic, but isn't in the same family of languages.

 

[Hook17]

I stand corrected - I am not a linguist. I googled it, and indeed, you are all right, and I was wrong, Hewbrew and Arabic (and Tigrinya) are all Semetic languages, so perhaps learning Arabic if you already speak Hebrew would be relatively easier. I don't think it was too hard though, and I only spoke English when I studied it. Interesting that Farsi uses the same alphabet as Arabic, but isn't in the same family of languages.

Many of the now muslim languages converted their script many centuries ago so their people could better learn the quran and adapt to the new religion and it made it easier to communicate with the islamic state at the time. However, in 1920 turkey decided to remove its islamic roots by changing the turkish script from arabic to latin.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

Double post.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

Many of the now muslim languages converted their script many centuries ago so their people could better learn the quran and adapt to the new religion and it made it easier to communicate with the islamic state at the time. However, in 1920 turkey decided to remove its islamic roots by changing the turkish script from arabic to latin.

Yes, alphabets mean nothing. Albanian was written in the Arabic, Cyrillic, Greek, or Latin alphabets, until the Latin alphabet was made the standard. Romanian used Cyrillic for a while, although it is a Romance and not a Slavic language. Japanese uses modified Chinese characters, although they are in entirely different linguistic families (Japanese is Altaic, like Korean, Turkic, Tungus, and Mongol, whereas Chinese is Sino-Tibetan, like Burmese and Tibetan).

Also, Yiddish, a Germanic language with Hungarian and Slavic influences, uses the Hebrew alphabet.

So yeah, alphabets mean nothing when it comes to linguistic origins.

 

[DemonDeacon]

syrian here, i kinda speak arabic mostly slang,

ahlan wa sahlan, same here! i took a few courses on formal arabic, can read the Quran, but that's as far as I go. i know little about their politics, so if i get asked in an interview, i'm doomed.

 

[jojosaxy]

First off let me just apologize for bringing politics into an otherwise happy board....I am just to curious to resist....
I am hoping that you guys, as a bunch of educated graduate students (or soon to be) can help me understand something that your heritage or nationality hopefully gives you some insight into...

I am an american jew (non-practising) who has only observed the middle east from afar (I am a news junkie), minus a recent trip to israel. I have a decent grasp of the history of the region (namely israel/palestine), and the one thing I cant understand is how things have deteriorated to this point. Now I know some responses to this will likely be discussions of israeli aggression and so on, but that isn´t fair, or intellectually honest. Because both sides, since grand mufti hussieni (excuse the spelling) was appointed in the thirties have been aggressive, violent, and at fault. what I am getting at is the serial inability of both sides to see the others perspective. So what I am going to try to do, in a sane and methodical way, is explain what to me seems to be the israeli/jewish perspective on the conflict. then I am hoping that you guys will fill me in on the arab perspective, hopefully also in a sane, methodical, and fair manner....

first off, it is impossible to look back at the creation of israel without taking into consideration the conflict that led up to it. Jews are the only race/ethnicity of people in the history of the world who have been persecuted to the level of industrial extermination. Granted, some of the things in Darfur, in somalia, etc, (I am sure there is an endless list that could go here) are awful as well, and it is impossible to compare the suffering created by such events. However the sheer numbers, and the industrial efficiency with which Hitlers final solution was pursued puts jews in a category seperate from other groups persecuted throughout history. Compacting this is the particpation of so many countries in the implementaton of the mass extermination (including pleas from Hussieni to hitler asking for him to deal with Palestine´s ¨jewsh problem¨ when he finished with europe. Now I am not mentioning this to justify the israeli/palestinian situaton now, but merely to illustrate the mindset of the jews who worked to create a jewish state. It was clear jews could not exist in other countries without fear of persecution, even death, and needed a home state.

The british mandate of palestine (and no, I am not using this terminology to suggest palesitne does not exist, but rather to be historically accurate) was the most sensible locaiton, seeing as the jewish people had a historic connection to the land, as well as the large number of jewish communities that already existed in several areas (jews were a majority in most of the areas originally partioned in ´48 - keep in mind how small this area was). Granted this undeniably meant creating a state out of land that some non-jews lived on, but given the historical context, it is reasonable to see the immediacy of the need for a jewish state, as well as how the decision was reached to officially declare isreal a state.

Now imagine the mindset of people fleeing persecution in europe, only to find themselves beset by a new wave of it. From the day israel was created every single neighboring country was determined to destroy it. For people fleeing extreme antisemitism, there could only be one understandable reason for this new aggression: more of the same. Given the choice between dying in europe (note that pogroms in russia, poland, etc, continued even after the war), or fighting in israel, many jews made the same decision that any of us would have, if faced with a similar situation. Try and put yourself into that situation, and imagine what decision you would make.

again let me just emphasize that I am trying to illustrate the jewish perspective of the history and conflict, not represent unquestionable historical fact. The other side to the story is one I am curious to hear, as long as it doesnt resort to blood libel and the like (which it unfortunately often seems to)....

since 1948 there have been numerous wars, from the jewish perspective all arab instigated, and I´m sure from the arab persepctive all israeli instigated. However one thing does distinguish the two sides of every one of these wars. In each war those fighting against israel repeatedly declared their intent to exterminate israel as a state. In no war was israel fighting to erase egypt, jordan, etc from the map. Israel´s restraint in 1967, the end of 73, the fact that israel has not used its nuclear weapons, as well as the fact that it has reached peace treaties with every willing neighbor (based entirely on land for peace deals) attest to as much.

Faced with a history of a hostile niehgborhood, and arab groups willing to act on their wish to drive israel from the land, it is little surprise that the Israelis are wary of the palestinians. If you look at the charters of every palestinian militant group, each includes an explicit statement calling for the destruction of israel. Not simply for a palestinian state, but for a palestinian state where israel now exists. given this, it is easy to see why israel is so willing to take action to protect itself.

a brief side note: when arab regimes massacre their own people, such as the syrian massacre of 40,000 (more than all the palestians ever killed by israel) at hama it 1982, collective world opinion (especially in the arab world) issues not a peep or protest. When saddam kills hundreds of thousands, or the saudi family tortures and kills hundreds of thousands, there is again no protest from the world, or arab community (I know there are an endless number of examples here). But when israel kills 50 palestinians there is a global uproar. again this is not to minimize the actions of the israelis, but only to illustrate the double standard they percieve applied to them.

now the history is clearly viewed differently by both sides. In fact I am sure today,yesteday, and tomorrow will be viewed differently by both sides. The thing I do not understand is why their seems to be so little willingness to negotiate from the arab/palestinian side. Both the 93 oslo accords and the 2001 camp david talks indicate israel´s willingness to negotiate the existence of a palestinian state. The peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan indicate israel´s willingness to exchange land for peace. But from the jewish perspective there seems to be no willingness, nor examples of palestinian negotiation. Each attempted negotiation has been followed by violence, rather than counter proposals. Is this the case or am I missing something? is there a general willingness in the arab world/in the palestinian population to exist alongside israel in a negotiated settlement? this is where your arab identities give you some insight that I am interested in.....

I hope you guys have found hearing this perspective informative, and I look forward to hearing the other side of the story.
I hope you are all well, and best of luck getting into to your respective schools, if you haven´t already.
keep it real,
j

 

[iraqiamerican]

Please no politics! 👎

 

[Hook17]

First off let me just apologize for bringing politics into an otherwise happy board....I am just to curious to resist....
I am hoping that you guys, as a bunch of educated graduate students (or soon to be) can help me understand something that your heritage or nationality hopefully gives you some insight into...

I am an american jew (non-practising) who has only observed the middle east from afar (I am a news junkie), minus a recent trip to israel. I have a decent grasp of the history of the region (namely israel/palestine), and the one thing I cant understand is how things have deteriorated to this point. Now I know some responses to this will likely be discussions of israeli aggression and so on, but that isn´t fair, or intellectually honest. Because both sides, since grand mufti hussieni (excuse the spelling) was appointed in the thirties have been aggressive, violent, and at fault. what I am getting at is the serial inability of both sides to see the others perspective. So what I am going to try to do, in a sane and methodical way, is explain what to me seems to be the israeli/jewish perspective on the conflict. then I am hoping that you guys will fill me in on the arab perspective, hopefully also in a sane, methodical, and fair manner....

first off, it is impossible to look back at the creation of israel without taking into consideration the conflict that led up to it. Jews are the only race/ethnicity of people in the history of the world who have been persecuted to the level of industrial extermination. Granted, some of the things in Darfur, in somalia, etc, (I am sure there is an endless list that could go here) are awful as well, and it is impossible to compare the suffering created by such events. However the sheer numbers, and the industrial efficiency with which Hitlers final solution was pursued puts jews in a category seperate from other groups persecuted throughout history. Compacting this is the particpation of so many countries in the implementaton of the mass extermination (including pleas from Hussieni to hitler asking for him to deal with Palestine´s ¨jewsh problem¨ when he finished with europe. Now I am not mentioning this to justify the israeli/palestinian situaton now, but merely to illustrate the mindset of the jews who worked to create a jewish state. It was clear jews could not exist in other countries without fear of persecution, even death, and needed a home state.

The british mandate of palestine (and no, I am not using this terminology to suggest palesitne does not exist, but rather to be historically accurate) was the most sensible locaiton, seeing as the jewish people had a historic connection to the land, as well as the large number of jewish communities that already existed in several areas (jews were a majority in most of the areas originally partioned in ´48 - keep in mind how small this area was). Granted this undeniably meant creating a state out of land that some non-jews lived on, but given the historical context, it is reasonable to see the immediacy of the need for a jewish state, as well as how the decision was reached to officially declare isreal a state.

Now imagine the mindset of people fleeing persecution in europe, only to find themselves beset by a new wave of it. From the day israel was created every single neighboring country was determined to destroy it. For people fleeing extreme antisemitism, there could only be one understandable reason for this new aggression: more of the same. Given the choice between dying in europe (note that pogroms in russia, poland, etc, continued even after the war), or fighting in israel, many jews made the same decision that any of us would have, if faced with a similar situation. Try and put yourself into that situation, and imagine what decision you would make.

again let me just emphasize that I am trying to illustrate the jewish perspective of the history and conflict, not represent unquestionable historical fact. The other side to the story is one I am curious to hear, as long as it doesnt resort to blood libel and the like (which it unfortunately often seems to)....

since 1948 there have been numerous wars, from the jewish perspective all arab instigated, and I´m sure from the arab persepctive all israeli instigated. However one thing does distinguish the two sides of every one of these wars. In each war those fighting against israel repeatedly declared their intent to exterminate israel as a state. In no war was israel fighting to erase egypt, jordan, etc from the map. Israel´s restraint in 1967, the end of 73, the fact that israel has not used its nuclear weapons, as well as the fact that it has reached peace treaties with every willing neighbor (based entirely on land for peace deals) attest to as much.

Faced with a history of a hostile niehgborhood, and arab groups willing to act on their wish to drive israel from the land, it is little surprise that the Israelis are wary of the palestinians. If you look at the charters of every palestinian militant group, each includes an explicit statement calling for the destruction of israel. Not simply for a palestinian state, but for a palestinian state where israel now exists. given this, it is easy to see why israel is so willing to take action to protect itself.

a brief side note: when arab regimes massacre their own people, such as the syrian massacre of 40,000 (more than all the palestians ever killed by israel) at hama it 1982, collective world opinion (especially in the arab world) issues not a peep or protest. When saddam kills hundreds of thousands, or the saudi family tortures and kills hundreds of thousands, there is again no protest from the world, or arab community (I know there are an endless number of examples here). But when israel kills 50 palestinians there is a global uproar. again this is not to minimize the actions of the israelis, but only to illustrate the double standard they percieve applied to them.

now the history is clearly viewed differently by both sides. In fact I am sure today,yesteday, and tomorrow will be viewed differently by both sides. The thing I do not understand is why their seems to be so little willingness to negotiate from the arab/palestinian side. Both the 93 oslo accords and the 2001 camp david talks indicate israel´s willingness to negotiate the existence of a palestinian state. The peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan indicate israel´s willingness to exchange land for peace. But from the jewish perspective there seems to be no willingness, nor examples of palestinian negotiation. Each attempted negotiation has been followed by violence, rather than counter proposals. Is this the case or am I missing something? is there a general willingness in the arab world/in the palestinian population to exist alongside israel in a negotiated settlement? this is where your arab identities give you some insight that I am interested in.....

I hope you guys have found hearing this perspective informative, and I look forward to hearing the other side of the story.
I hope you are all well, and best of luck getting into to your respective schools, if you haven´t already.
keep it real,
j

I love these one sided posts that totally disregard the other side, I think you sort of answered your own question. I can't you believe you said the arab world should be grateful israel has not used nuclear weapons. Get a life dude try reading from news outlets that are not pro-israeli, and stepping across the green line.

 

[Hoooba]

I love these one sided posts that totally disregard the other side, I think you sort of answered your own question. I can't you believe you said the arab world should be grateful israel has not used nuclear weapons. Get a life dude try reading from news outlets that are not pro-israeli, and stepping across the green line.

Nicely Done

 

[Denn]

First off let me just apologize for bringing politics into an otherwise happy board....I am just to curious to resist....
I am hoping that you guys, as a bunch of educated graduate students (or soon to be) can help me understand something that your heritage or nationality hopefully gives you some insight into...

I am an american jew (non-practising) who has only observed the middle east from afar (I am a news junkie), minus a recent trip to israel. I have a decent grasp of the history of the region (namely israel/palestine), and the one thing I cant understand is how things have deteriorated to this point. Now I know some responses to this will likely be discussions of israeli aggression and so on, but that isn´t fair, or intellectually honest. Because both sides, since grand mufti hussieni (excuse the spelling) was appointed in the thirties have been aggressive, violent, and at fault. what I am getting at is the serial inability of both sides to see the others perspective. So what I am going to try to do, in a sane and methodical way, is explain what to me seems to be the israeli/jewish perspective on the conflict. then I am hoping that you guys will fill me in on the arab perspective, hopefully also in a sane, methodical, and fair manner....

first off, it is impossible to look back at the creation of israel without taking into consideration the conflict that led up to it. Jews are the only race/ethnicity of people in the history of the world who have been persecuted to the level of industrial extermination. Granted, some of the things in Darfur, in somalia, etc, (I am sure there is an endless list that could go here) are awful as well, and it is impossible to compare the suffering created by such events. However the sheer numbers, and the industrial efficiency with which Hitlers final solution was pursued puts jews in a category seperate from other groups persecuted throughout history. Compacting this is the particpation of so many countries in the implementaton of the mass extermination (including pleas from Hussieni to hitler asking for him to deal with Palestine´s ¨jewsh problem¨ when he finished with europe. Now I am not mentioning this to justify the israeli/palestinian situaton now, but merely to illustrate the mindset of the jews who worked to create a jewish state. It was clear jews could not exist in other countries without fear of persecution, even death, and needed a home state.

The british mandate of palestine (and no, I am not using this terminology to suggest palesitne does not exist, but rather to be historically accurate) was the most sensible locaiton, seeing as the jewish people had a historic connection to the land, as well as the large number of jewish communities that already existed in several areas (jews were a majority in most of the areas originally partioned in ´48 - keep in mind how small this area was). Granted this undeniably meant creating a state out of land that some non-jews lived on, but given the historical context, it is reasonable to see the immediacy of the need for a jewish state, as well as how the decision was reached to officially declare isreal a state.

Now imagine the mindset of people fleeing persecution in europe, only to find themselves beset by a new wave of it. From the day israel was created every single neighboring country was determined to destroy it. For people fleeing extreme antisemitism, there could only be one understandable reason for this new aggression: more of the same. Given the choice between dying in europe (note that pogroms in russia, poland, etc, continued even after the war), or fighting in israel, many jews made the same decision that any of us would have, if faced with a similar situation. Try and put yourself into that situation, and imagine what decision you would make.

again let me just emphasize that I am trying to illustrate the jewish perspective of the history and conflict, not represent unquestionable historical fact. The other side to the story is one I am curious to hear, as long as it doesnt resort to blood libel and the like (which it unfortunately often seems to)....

since 1948 there have been numerous wars, from the jewish perspective all arab instigated, and I´m sure from the arab persepctive all israeli instigated. However one thing does distinguish the two sides of every one of these wars. In each war those fighting against israel repeatedly declared their intent to exterminate israel as a state. In no war was israel fighting to erase egypt, jordan, etc from the map. Israel´s restraint in 1967, the end of 73, the fact that israel has not used its nuclear weapons, as well as the fact that it has reached peace treaties with every willing neighbor (based entirely on land for peace deals) attest to as much.

Faced with a history of a hostile niehgborhood, and arab groups willing to act on their wish to drive israel from the land, it is little surprise that the Israelis are wary of the palestinians. If you look at the charters of every palestinian militant group, each includes an explicit statement calling for the destruction of israel. Not simply for a palestinian state, but for a palestinian state where israel now exists. given this, it is easy to see why israel is so willing to take action to protect itself.

a brief side note: when arab regimes massacre their own people, such as the syrian massacre of 40,000 (more than all the palestians ever killed by israel) at hama it 1982, collective world opinion (especially in the arab world) issues not a peep or protest. When saddam kills hundreds of thousands, or the saudi family tortures and kills hundreds of thousands, there is again no protest from the world, or arab community (I know there are an endless number of examples here). But when israel kills 50 palestinians there is a global uproar. again this is not to minimize the actions of the israelis, but only to illustrate the double standard they percieve applied to them.

now the history is clearly viewed differently by both sides. In fact I am sure today,yesteday, and tomorrow will be viewed differently by both sides. The thing I do not understand is why their seems to be so little willingness to negotiate from the arab/palestinian side. Both the 93 oslo accords and the 2001 camp david talks indicate israel´s willingness to negotiate the existence of a palestinian state. The peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan indicate israel´s willingness to exchange land for peace. But from the jewish perspective there seems to be no willingness, nor examples of palestinian negotiation. Each attempted negotiation has been followed by violence, rather than counter proposals. Is this the case or am I missing something? is there a general willingness in the arab world/in the palestinian population to exist alongside israel in a negotiated settlement? this is where your arab identities give you some insight that I am interested in.....

I hope you guys have found hearing this perspective informative, and I look forward to hearing the other side of the story.
I hope you are all well, and best of luck getting into to your respective schools, if you haven´t already.
keep it real,
j

That's pathetic. You were for sure raised to see YOUR side of the story(your teachers did a gread job 🙄 .) Zero posts so far, and you are already spreading hatred.

 

[nimer1456]

There are so many things that I want to say to this guy right now... but I will restrain myself. Jojo, I wrote a report about this conflict in college. If you want to read it I will send it to you. I kept it as neutral as I could but it will explain things from a Palestinians view.

Please keep this crap out of this forum... we were talking about music and our home towns before you snuck in.

 

[tigress]

um, yeah, that's why I said before we should try to appreciate each other and not bring politics into this

jojosaxy, how would you feel if somebody came to you right now and took over your house and your neighborhood and decided to live there, but justified it because they had been persecuted? Say somebody from a modern-day genocide, of which there are many, came and said they have the right to their own land? Or if an American Indian came and said they owned the land first, they have an historical connection to it, so they'll just take it back, thank you very much?

Yes, there were continuous Jewish communities in Jerusalem, Safed, and (probably) Hebron. Very small communities. And yes, obviously there is a strong Jewish connection to the land. And Jews have been undeniably persecuted through history, and the existence of Israel and its victories in war probably contributed to the current low level of antisemitism in much of the Western world. At this point, however, the opposite is happening: Israel is only contributing to an increase in antisemitism. That ought to point something out. There's obviously a problem here.

You're not trying to see this from both perspectives. I agree with a few of the points you made, but overall your post shows that you have only the Jewish perspective on the issue. At this point, both sides are at fault. But originally, Jewish settlers came into the region of Palestine and felt entitled to their own country. And much of the early Israeli Zionist writing shows strong anti-Arab, pro-European bias. This contributed to the bias against Arab Jews who immigrated to Israel, as well.

I think there are sides to this that many Palestinians don't see, either. And at this point, Israel is a reality, and a Palestinian state must be a reality in the near future as well. There are other important issues to consider as well. I think it's great that Israel is a "Jewish state," but what exactly should that mean? No other Western democracy tries to have a partial theocracy, or limits immigration based on religion. I'm not sure that is practical in the modern world. A state called Israel, majority Jewish, with a Jewish flavor to its culture, but secular in all things political, would be much more reasonable. There's nothing wrong with the national holidays being the Jewish holidays (after all, in the US Christian holidays are national holidays), or other such things.

I've already written way to much in response to your post. There's no reason why the thread for Arab pre-med students, who would like to have their own thread, like other groups of people have, should contain arguments concerning Israel. So I'm going to try not to write anything more about it.

 

[Shobra]

First off let me just apologize for bringing politics into an otherwise happy board....I am just to curious to resist....
I am hoping that you guys, as a bunch of educated graduate students (or soon to be) can help me understand something that your heritage or nationality hopefully gives you some insight into...

I am an american jew (non-practising) who has only observed the middle east from afar (I am a news junkie), minus a recent trip to israel. I have a decent grasp of the history of the region (namely israel/palestine), and the one thing I cant understand is how things have deteriorated to this point. Now I know some responses to this will likely be discussions of israeli aggression and so on, but that isn´t fair, or intellectually honest. Because both sides, since grand mufti hussieni (excuse the spelling) was appointed in the thirties have been aggressive, violent, and at fault. what I am getting at is the serial inability of both sides to see the others perspective. So what I am going to try to do, in a sane and methodical way, is explain what to me seems to be the israeli/jewish perspective on the conflict. then I am hoping that you guys will fill me in on the arab perspective, hopefully also in a sane, methodical, and fair manner....

first off, it is impossible to look back at the creation of israel without taking into consideration the conflict that led up to it. Jews are the only race/ethnicity of people in the history of the world who have been persecuted to the level of industrial extermination. Granted, some of the things in Darfur, in somalia, etc, (I am sure there is an endless list that could go here) are awful as well, and it is impossible to compare the suffering created by such events. However the sheer numbers, and the industrial efficiency with which Hitlers final solution was pursued puts jews in a category seperate from other groups persecuted throughout history. Compacting this is the particpation of so many countries in the implementaton of the mass extermination (including pleas from Hussieni to hitler asking for him to deal with Palestine´s ¨jewsh problem¨ when he finished with europe. Now I am not mentioning this to justify the israeli/palestinian situaton now, but merely to illustrate the mindset of the jews who worked to create a jewish state. It was clear jews could not exist in other countries without fear of persecution, even death, and needed a home state.

The british mandate of palestine (and no, I am not using this terminology to suggest palesitne does not exist, but rather to be historically accurate) was the most sensible locaiton, seeing as the jewish people had a historic connection to the land, as well as the large number of jewish communities that already existed in several areas (jews were a majority in most of the areas originally partioned in ´48 - keep in mind how small this area was). Granted this undeniably meant creating a state out of land that some non-jews lived on, but given the historical context, it is reasonable to see the immediacy of the need for a jewish state, as well as how the decision was reached to officially declare isreal a state.

Now imagine the mindset of people fleeing persecution in europe, only to find themselves beset by a new wave of it. From the day israel was created every single neighboring country was determined to destroy it. For people fleeing extreme antisemitism, there could only be one understandable reason for this new aggression: more of the same. Given the choice between dying in europe (note that pogroms in russia, poland, etc, continued even after the war), or fighting in israel, many jews made the same decision that any of us would have, if faced with a similar situation. Try and put yourself into that situation, and imagine what decision you would make.

again let me just emphasize that I am trying to illustrate the jewish perspective of the history and conflict, not represent unquestionable historical fact. The other side to the story is one I am curious to hear, as long as it doesnt resort to blood libel and the like (which it unfortunately often seems to)....

since 1948 there have been numerous wars, from the jewish perspective all arab instigated, and I´m sure from the arab persepctive all israeli instigated. However one thing does distinguish the two sides of every one of these wars. In each war those fighting against israel repeatedly declared their intent to exterminate israel as a state. In no war was israel fighting to erase egypt, jordan, etc from the map. Israel´s restraint in 1967, the end of 73, the fact that israel has not used its nuclear weapons, as well as the fact that it has reached peace treaties with every willing neighbor (based entirely on land for peace deals) attest to as much.

Faced with a history of a hostile niehgborhood, and arab groups willing to act on their wish to drive israel from the land, it is little surprise that the Israelis are wary of the palestinians. If you look at the charters of every palestinian militant group, each includes an explicit statement calling for the destruction of israel. Not simply for a palestinian state, but for a palestinian state where israel now exists. given this, it is easy to see why israel is so willing to take action to protect itself.

a brief side note: when arab regimes massacre their own people, such as the syrian massacre of 40,000 (more than all the palestians ever killed by israel) at hama it 1982, collective world opinion (especially in the arab world) issues not a peep or protest. When saddam kills hundreds of thousands, or the saudi family tortures and kills hundreds of thousands, there is again no protest from the world, or arab community (I know there are an endless number of examples here). But when israel kills 50 palestinians there is a global uproar. again this is not to minimize the actions of the israelis, but only to illustrate the double standard they percieve applied to them.

now the history is clearly viewed differently by both sides. In fact I am sure today,yesteday, and tomorrow will be viewed differently by both sides. The thing I do not understand is why their seems to be so little willingness to negotiate from the arab/palestinian side. Both the 93 oslo accords and the 2001 camp david talks indicate israel´s willingness to negotiate the existence of a palestinian state. The peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan indicate israel´s willingness to exchange land for peace. But from the jewish perspective there seems to be no willingness, nor examples of palestinian negotiation. Each attempted negotiation has been followed by violence, rather than counter proposals. Is this the case or am I missing something? is there a general willingness in the arab world/in the palestinian population to exist alongside israel in a negotiated settlement? this is where your arab identities give you some insight that I am interested in.....

I hope you guys have found hearing this perspective informative, and I look forward to hearing the other side of the story.
I hope you are all well, and best of luck getting into to your respective schools, if you haven´t already.
keep it real,
j

Man, I'm sure that you can find many arabs around you to talk to you about this. Go and ask them. Why do you have to put it in a forum originally designated for medical students and medical school applicants? What's your deal? 👎

 

[BaylorGuy]

So....how's it going??

Changing the subject, I've got a family friend getting married this weekend. His family is from Gaza i wouldnt be suprised if its going to be a huge wedding as usual. The one thing i'm looking forward to is the food. And most likely, it will be goat...the greatest meat on the planet (if cooked right). I'm stoked.

 

[tigress]

So....how's it going??

Changing the subject, I've got a family friend getting married this weekend. His family is from Gaza i wouldnt be suprised if its going to be a huge wedding as usual. The one thing i'm looking forward to is the food. And most likely, it will be goat...the greatest meat on the planet (if cooked right). I'm stoked.

really? goat is good? I wouldn't have thought. What is the right way to cook it?

I was reading a book (non-fictin) that described wedding ceremonies in which the ceremony itself happened, and then a few months went by before the wedding party. The man and woman did not live together in that time. Is that usual?

 

[Hook17]

lamb is much tastier than goat, and yea palestinian weddings rock, they can help pay for medical school

 

[BaylorGuy]

really? goat is good? I wouldn't have thought. What is the right way to cook it?

I was reading a book (non-fictin) that described wedding ceremonies in which the ceremony itself happened, and then a few months went by before the wedding party. The man and woman did not live together in that time. Is that usual?

This is not uncommon. Its kind of like an engagement, but they are legally and religiously married. And then the ceremony is held later. This family friend technically got married two weeks ago. The ceremony is this weekend though....more like a reception i would say...music, singing, dancing, the food. Many of the arabic weddings i go to are like this. Personally, i would like it this way as well.

Yeah, Lamb is a little tastier than goat....its all the same to me. I guess i meant lamb...i get confused sometimes. It doesnt matter though, if its cooked right its good.

Tigress, there are a couple of ways to cook it right. One way, you stuff the inside with a wild rice mixture and then spice up the outside and then put it in an oven for a couple of hours at a high temp. Many of the ways involved the oven....the real factor is the spices used on the meat...not the normal spices you would use on beef (like cumin, a little curry powder, salt, pepper, dried mint, za'atar (i dont know what it translates to) and a couple others). I've been wanting to make a luau using a whole lamb/goat instead of pork. I bet it would taste just as good.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

First off let me just apologize for bringing politics into an otherwise happy board....I am just to curious to resist....
I am hoping that you guys, as a bunch of educated graduate students (or soon to be) can help me understand something that your heritage or nationality hopefully gives you some insight into...

I am an american jew (non-practising) who has only observed the middle east from afar (I am a news junkie), minus a recent trip to israel. I have a decent grasp of the history of the region (namely israel/palestine), and the one thing I cant understand is how things have deteriorated to this point. Now I know some responses to this will likely be discussions of israeli aggression and so on, but that isn´t fair, or intellectually honest. Because both sides, since grand mufti hussieni (excuse the spelling) was appointed in the thirties have been aggressive, violent, and at fault. what I am getting at is the serial inability of both sides to see the others perspective. So what I am going to try to do, in a sane and methodical way, is explain what to me seems to be the israeli/jewish perspective on the conflict. then I am hoping that you guys will fill me in on the arab perspective, hopefully also in a sane, methodical, and fair manner....

first off, it is impossible to look back at the creation of israel without taking into consideration the conflict that led up to it. Jews are the only race/ethnicity of people in the history of the world who have been persecuted to the level of industrial extermination. Granted, some of the things in Darfur, in somalia, etc, (I am sure there is an endless list that could go here) are awful as well, and it is impossible to compare the suffering created by such events. However the sheer numbers, and the industrial efficiency with which Hitlers final solution was pursued puts jews in a category seperate from other groups persecuted throughout history. Compacting this is the particpation of so many countries in the implementaton of the mass extermination (including pleas from Hussieni to hitler asking for him to deal with Palestine´s ¨jewsh problem¨ when he finished with europe. Now I am not mentioning this to justify the israeli/palestinian situaton now, but merely to illustrate the mindset of the jews who worked to create a jewish state. It was clear jews could not exist in other countries without fear of persecution, even death, and needed a home state.

The british mandate of palestine (and no, I am not using this terminology to suggest palesitne does not exist, but rather to be historically accurate) was the most sensible locaiton, seeing as the jewish people had a historic connection to the land, as well as the large number of jewish communities that already existed in several areas (jews were a majority in most of the areas originally partioned in ´48 - keep in mind how small this area was). Granted this undeniably meant creating a state out of land that some non-jews lived on, but given the historical context, it is reasonable to see the immediacy of the need for a jewish state, as well as how the decision was reached to officially declare isreal a state.

Now imagine the mindset of people fleeing persecution in europe, only to find themselves beset by a new wave of it. From the day israel was created every single neighboring country was determined to destroy it. For people fleeing extreme antisemitism, there could only be one understandable reason for this new aggression: more of the same. Given the choice between dying in europe (note that pogroms in russia, poland, etc, continued even after the war), or fighting in israel, many jews made the same decision that any of us would have, if faced with a similar situation. Try and put yourself into that situation, and imagine what decision you would make.

again let me just emphasize that I am trying to illustrate the jewish perspective of the history and conflict, not represent unquestionable historical fact. The other side to the story is one I am curious to hear, as long as it doesnt resort to blood libel and the like (which it unfortunately often seems to)....

since 1948 there have been numerous wars, from the jewish perspective all arab instigated, and I´m sure from the arab persepctive all israeli instigated. However one thing does distinguish the two sides of every one of these wars. In each war those fighting against israel repeatedly declared their intent to exterminate israel as a state. In no war was israel fighting to erase egypt, jordan, etc from the map. Israel´s restraint in 1967, the end of 73, the fact that israel has not used its nuclear weapons, as well as the fact that it has reached peace treaties with every willing neighbor (based entirely on land for peace deals) attest to as much.

Faced with a history of a hostile niehgborhood, and arab groups willing to act on their wish to drive israel from the land, it is little surprise that the Israelis are wary of the palestinians. If you look at the charters of every palestinian militant group, each includes an explicit statement calling for the destruction of israel. Not simply for a palestinian state, but for a palestinian state where israel now exists. given this, it is easy to see why israel is so willing to take action to protect itself.

a brief side note: when arab regimes massacre their own people, such as the syrian massacre of 40,000 (more than all the palestians ever killed by israel) at hama it 1982, collective world opinion (especially in the arab world) issues not a peep or protest. When saddam kills hundreds of thousands, or the saudi family tortures and kills hundreds of thousands, there is again no protest from the world, or arab community (I know there are an endless number of examples here). But when israel kills 50 palestinians there is a global uproar. again this is not to minimize the actions of the israelis, but only to illustrate the double standard they percieve applied to them.

now the history is clearly viewed differently by both sides. In fact I am sure today,yesteday, and tomorrow will be viewed differently by both sides. The thing I do not understand is why their seems to be so little willingness to negotiate from the arab/palestinian side. Both the 93 oslo accords and the 2001 camp david talks indicate israel´s willingness to negotiate the existence of a palestinian state. The peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan indicate israel´s willingness to exchange land for peace. But from the jewish perspective there seems to be no willingness, nor examples of palestinian negotiation. Each attempted negotiation has been followed by violence, rather than counter proposals. Is this the case or am I missing something? is there a general willingness in the arab world/in the palestinian population to exist alongside israel in a negotiated settlement? this is where your arab identities give you some insight that I am interested in.....

I hope you guys have found hearing this perspective informative, and I look forward to hearing the other side of the story.
I hope you are all well, and best of luck getting into to your respective schools, if you haven´t already.
keep it real,
j

I don't want to comment on most of this, since it is so one sided. However, I do think that the collectivization of innocence and guilt that many (particularly American) Jews seem to suffer from, plays a big role in this. Palestinians are not Germans, they are not even descended of the direct perpetrators of the Holocaust, so why is their abuse being justified? In principle, I think it is a matter of incorrect historical information. You say that the Holocaust was somehow unique, and cannot be compared to Darfur, etc., which I do agree with. However, it was not unique in terms of being a well-organized state-sponsored genocide. In this century alone there have been a number of true genocides, of which the Holocaust was the most massive. You can discount the Cambodian, if you choose, because it was class-based, rather than rooted in religion or ethnicity or race.

But you are ignoring three other genocides that took place before or during the Jewish one. What about the Armenian genocide WWI, in which 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated by the Turkish government, they were thrown off of ships, drowned in the Euphrates, burned alive, raped, force to convert to Islam, starved, etc. Or what of the Serbian genocide in WWII, in which nearly 1 million Serbs were exterminated by the Croatian government, and its Muslim allies, mostly in the Croatian death camp of Jasenovac? Or what about the Gypsy (Roma) genocide of hundreds of thousands by the Nazis, which seems to be far more underreported than the Holocaust.

And if we go beyond strictly genocide, didn't the 27 million Russians who perished in WWII suffer greatly, or the three million non-Jewish Poles, or Greeks in the population exchanges of the 1920s, or Chinese under the Japanese during WWII, etc.?

I am not trying to say that the Holocaust wasn't the most massive genocide, or that it plays no role in current events, because it does. But I think it is a dangerous position for anyone to claim that their suffering was unique, that they somehow have a monopoly on a particular strain of suffering. This is an incorrect picture, and it leads to a lack of empathy for "the enemy." If you convince yourself that your own suffering is unique (even though you, personally, as an American Jew, probably did not suffer from the Holocaust, and probably neither did your direct ancestors), you can justify anything, you fail to see the suffering of another human being, you cannot put yourself in their position - and putting oneself in anothers' position is what is crucial for any peace talks or agreement.

 

[Shobra]

I don't want to comment on most of this, since it is so one sided. However, I do think that the collectivization of innocence and guilt that many (particularly American) Jews seem to suffer from, plays a big role in this. Palestinians are not Germans, they are not even descended of the direct perpetrators of the Holocaust, so why is their abuse being justified? In principle, I think it is a matter of incorrect historical information. You say that the Holocaust was somehow unique, and cannot be compared to Darfur, etc., which I do agree with. However, it was not unique in terms of being a well-organized state-sponsored genocide. In this century alone there have been a number of true genocides, of which the Holocaust was the most massive. You can discount the Cambodian, if you choose, because it was class-based, rather than rooted in religion or ethnicity or race.

But you are ignoring three other genocides that took place before or during the Jewish one. What about the Armenian genocide WWI, in which 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated by the Turkish government, they were thrown off of ships, drowned in the Euphrates, burned alive, raped, force to convert to Islam, starved, etc. Or what of the Serbian genocide in WWII, in which nearly 1 million Serbs were exterminated by the Croatian government, and its Muslim allies, mostly in the Croatian death camp of Jasenovac? Or what about the Gypsy (Roma) genocide of hundreds of thousands by the Nazis, which seems to be far more underreported than the Holocaust.

And if we go beyond strictly genocide, didn't the 27 million Russians who perished in WWII suffer greatly, or the three million non-Jewish Poles, or Greeks in the population exchanges of the 1920s, or Chinese under the Japanese during WWII, etc.?

I am not trying to say that the Holocaust wasn't the most massive genocide, or that it plays no role in current events, because it does. But I think it is a dangerous position for anyone to claim that their suffering was unique, that they somehow have a monopoly on a particular strain of suffering. This is an incorrect picture, and it leads to a lack of empathy for "the enemy." If you convince yourself that your own suffering is unique (even though you, personally, as an American Jew, probably did not suffer from the Holocaust, and probably neither did your direct ancestors), you can justify anything, you fail to see the suffering of another human being, you cannot put yourself in their position - and putting oneself in anothers' position is what is crucial for any peace talks or agreement.

Well-put! 👍

 

[tigress]

This is not uncommon. Its kind of like an engagement, but they are legally and religiously married. And then the ceremony is held later. This family friend technically got married two weeks ago. The ceremony is this weekend though....more like a reception i would say...music, singing, dancing, the food. Many of the arabic weddings i go to are like this. Personally, i would like it this way as well.

Yeah, Lamb is a little tastier than goat....its all the same to me. I guess i meant lamb...i get confused sometimes. It doesnt matter though, if its cooked right its good.

Tigress, there are a couple of ways to cook it right. One way, you stuff the inside with a wild rice mixture and then spice up the outside and then put it in an oven for a couple of hours at a high temp. Many of the ways involved the oven....the real factor is the spices used on the meat...not the normal spices you would use on beef (like cumin, a little curry powder, salt, pepper, dried mint, za'atar (i dont know what it translates to) and a couple others). I've been wanting to make a luau using a whole lamb/goat instead of pork. I bet it would taste just as good.

Interesting about the weddings. Jewish weddings were originally sort of like this, too: there was a betrothal, and then later on there was the actual marriage. In between the couple was sort of half married. Now it's all done together, though.

I've had lamb before, I think, and it was really good. I know za'atar, as it's used in Israel, but I don't know the translation either 🙂. I think it's just a spice mixture sort of (?)

My friends from Iran say that the food here in the US is too bland, because they're used to spicy Middle Eastern cooking. I think there are more spices easily available than there used to be, though, so probably people are starting to adopt Middle Eastern and Indian and Mexican and all sorts of other cuisines and sort of turning them into something unique. Sort of like a luau with a whole lamb 🙂