IN reply to S Musa's letter printed on Saturday, November 18.
Surely, to be a 'fair and concerned human being', don't you need to consider both sides of an argument or dispute, and present a conciliatory humanitarian solution? Are there not people from both sides being injured and killed? I think the writer is somewhat blinkered in this respect.
Is not the current dispute about the return of land, and not the acquiring of land? In particular the land lost to the Israelis the last time the Arabs (Muslims) ganged up on them, made war and lost.
Was it not at this time the then Muslim-controlled Jerusalem prohibited Jews from visiting their most important shrine? Short memories eh!
However, since then some sense and compassion has prevailed, with most of the acquired land having been returned to those who have been prepared to act like neighbours and not aggressors. This leaves the land belonging to the Palestinians.
On numerous occasions, the world powers have brokered possible settlements, to be thwarted by extreme factions of the Muslim brotherhood, who have stirred up civil unrest and fuelled deep-seated hatred against the Israelis, making it impossible to make a settlement.
Surely it must be clear to all Muslims that no amount of threatening behaviour or civil unrest will persuade the Israelis to return land, only a peaceful and neighbourly solution will -- and who can blame them.
So is it not time the Muslim faith showed some responsibility, by promoting a peaceful solution rather than peaceful marches in support of one half of a conflict?
(Name and address supplied) Onserver'
Barcroft Road
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article