How many people know of Saladin?

If a Muslim prince could have ruled Jerusalem circa 1000 years ago, why do people imagine that the muslims there today are not indigenes.

How long is a group required to dwell in a place before being considered indigenous thereto?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l3huunX_Ls

DeepSight:
How many people know of Saladin?

If a Muslim prince could have ruled Jerusalem circa 1000 years ago, why do people imagine that the muslims there today are not indigenes.

How long is a group required to dwell in a place before being considered indigenous thereto?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l3huunX_Ls

Was Saladin Palestinian?

Lawag3:



Was Saladin Palestinian?

- - - - >

DeepSight:


If a Muslim prince could have ruled Jerusalem circa 1000 years ago, why do people imagine that the muslims there today are not indigenes.

DeepSight:


- - - - >

Muslim ruled Spain. Are they indeginous to Spain?

Fulani ruled and still rule in some parts of Nigeria. Are they the indeginous people?


Britain ruled India. The Brits are indeginous to India right?


The only Moslem that is indeginous to the land of Israel is a Moslem of Jewish descent.

Lawag3:


Muslim ruled Spain. Are they indeginous to Spain?

Fulani ruled and still rule in some parts of Nigeria. Are they the indeginous people?


Britain ruled India. The Brits are indeginous to India right?


The only Moslem that is indeginous to the land of Israel is a Moslem of Jewish descent.

The real question is not about rule but this -

DeepSight:


How long is a group required to dwell in a place before being considered indigenous thereto?

Muslims have been in Palestine for about a thousand years now.

If Europeans who have been in America for less than half of that time are considered perfectly American, what are we saying?

DeepSight:


The real question is not about rule but this -



Muslims have been in Palestine for about a thousand years now.

If Europeans who have been in America for less than half of that time are considered perfectly American, what are we saying?

Yeah but European Americans are not called the indigenous people.

That's the red Indians are the indeginous people of America. Nobody will call trump Biden or any white American indeginous.

Lawag3:


Yeah but European Americans are not called the indigenous people.

That's the red Indians are the indeginous people of America. Nobody will call trump Biden or any white American indeginous.

Yes but after the length of period they have been there, no one will possibly question their right to be there.

DeepSight:


Yes but after the length of period they have been there, no one will possibly question their right to be there.

There are Arab Moslems in Israel nobody is telling them they can't live in Israel and Arab Moslem hold high positions in Israel.


The people who are questioning the right of another to be on the land are the people chanting from the river to the sea.

DeepSight:
How many people know of Saladin?

If a Muslim prince could have ruled Jerusalem circa 1000 years ago, why do people imagine that the muslims there today are not indigenes.

How long is a group required to dwell in a place before being considered indigenous thereto?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l3huunX_Ls

@Deepsight, bulk of the current Jews in Israel today are only Jews by association, not by ethnicity. Any wonder why they have no respect for the Holy City of Jerusalem. What many fail to realize is that most of the real Jewish people (by ethnicity) do not support Satanyahoo.

Only on Nairaland will you see people supporting others (who hate them) just to spite the others. Being a Christian in Israel means debasement, being an African means doubles debasement.

Saladdin (May God Bless Him) was one of the most noblest Generals from his time down to the modern day. (I chose his name as my moniker). He understood the significance of the Holy land of Jerusalem to Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Hence, he tried to preserve it's sanctity.

While the Europeans Crusaders were rulling the city, they killed, raped and punished the Jews.

When Saladdin the great conquered Jerusalem, he did so without destroying the city, nor seizing the properties of others, nor raping nor shedding innocent blood. He treated his PoW with the highest respect and courtesy and even forgave many of his enemies, despite their atrocities. He also allowed Non-Muslims access to it while he could have claimed it alone, and rightfully so.


This is what the current barbarians in Israel and their supporters on Nairaland needs to know. Anyone or group of people organizing gay parades, commiting murder and desecration can only be of the devil, not God.

Satanyahoo and co will definitely be disgraced.

Saladdin:


@Deepsight, bulk of the current Jews in Israel today are only Jews by association, not by ethnicity. Any wonder why they have no respect for the Holy City of Jerusalem. What many fail to realize is that most of the real Jewish people (by ethnicity) do not support Satanyahoo.

Only in Nairaland will you see people supporting others (who hate them) just to spite the others. Being a Christian in Israel means debasement, being an African means doubles debasement.

Saladin (May God Bless Him) was one of the most noblest Generals from his time down to the modern day. (I chose his name as my moniker). He understood the significance of the Holy land of Jerusalem to Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Hence, he tried to preserve it's sanctity.

While the Europeans Crusaders we're rulling the city, they killed, raped and punished the Jews.

When Saladin the great conquered Jerusalem, he did so without destroying the city, nor seizing the properties of others, nor raping nor shedding innocent blodd. He treated his PoW with the highest respect and courtesy and even forgave many of his enemies, despite their atrocities. He also allowed Non-Muslims access to it while he could have claimed it alone, and rightfully so.


This is what the current barbarians in Israel and their supporters on Nairaland needs to know. Anyone or group of people organizing gay parades, commiting murder and desecration can only be of the devil, not God.

Satanyahoo and co will definitely be disgraced.

May you be blessed for this post.

DeepSight:
How many people know of Saladin?

If a Muslim prince could have ruled Jerusalem circa 1000 years ago, why do people imagine that the muslims there today are not indigenes.

How long is a group required to dwell in a place before being considered indigenous thereto?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l3huunX_Ls

Have you heard of King David? Why do you believe that the Jews are not the indigenous people of the West Bank?

DeepSight:
How many people know of Saladin?

If a Muslim prince could have ruled Jerusalem circa 1000 years ago, why do people imagine that the muslims there today are not indigenes.

How long is a group required to dwell in a place before being considered indigenous thereto?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l3huunX_Ls

Answer the question in the link below if you can
https://youtube.com/shorts/unKLx17NeZQ?si=vySytTbpREoUmqLD

Who is doing the VO? Why would a jew do a VO to help remind muslims to attack Israel? it's stupid

tctrills:

Have you heard of King David? Why do you believe that the Jews are not the indigenous people of the West Bank?

I have addressed this question in detail in posts you said you were not minded to read.

And my position has been simple, being away for 2000 years it is absurd for them to return and claim exclusivity over a land others have occupied for 1000 years. However in light of the wars which have transpired since 1948, both sets of people ought to reach reasonable compromises which recognize one another's human and national rights devoid of the apartheid, segregation and colonialism which currently obtains.

PS: I hope you have taken your medication this morning and afternoon. We are very concerned because the psychiatrist has been looking for you.

DeepSight:


I have addressed this question in detail in posts you said you were not minded to read.

And my position has been simple, being away for 2000 years it is absurd for them to return and claim exclusivity over a land others have occupied for 1000 years. However in light of the wars which have transpired since 1948, both sets of people ought to reach reasonable compromises which recognize one another's human and national rights devoid of the apartheid, segregation and colonialism which currently obtains.

PS: I hope you have taken your medication this morning and afternoon. We are very concerned because the psychiatrist has been looking for you.

Confused as usual and you have zero understanding of history.
But by your logic, if the Jews have no right to their home after being forced out, why should the Arabs be granted such a right.
My boy, you have a long way to go.
Talking about both groups reaching a peaceful resolution, it was your Arabs that rejected this in 1948 and in the Oslo accords and even the Trump peace plan.
My boy, your journey is only beginning.

tctrills:

Confused as usual and you have zero understanding of history.
But by your logic, if the Jews have no right to their home after being forced out, why should the Arabs be granted such a right.
My boy, you have a long way to go.
Talking about both groups reaching a peaceful resolution, it was your Arabs that rejected this in 1948 and in the Oslo accords and even the Trump peace plan.
My boy, your journey is only beginning.

Have you taken the meds?
The shrink is really disturbed by your condition.

DeepSight:


Have you taken the meds?
The shrink is really disturbed by your condition.

You believe the Jews have no right to their home after being forced out but the Arabs should have the right to the land after being kicked out in a war the started. Continue
I love the way your antisemitic mind works.

tctrills:

You believe the Jews have no right to their home after being forced out but the Arabs should have the right to the land after being kicked out in a war the started. Continue

I said have you taken the meds? ? ? ?

Answer me!
A group of military nurses has been dispatched to contain you.

Cooperate.

DeepSight:


I said have you taken the meds? ? ? ?

Answer me!
A group of military nurses has been dispatched to contain you.

Cooperate.

Loool
You just made a fool of yourself as always.
You are the same boy who thinks Israel should always be slaves to the UN because it was founded by the UN mandate but you don't think Nigeria should answer to the UK even though we were established by the British mandate.
You are confused.

tctrills:

Loool
You just made a fool of yourself as always.
You are the same boy who thinks Israel should always be slaves to the UN because it was founded by the UN mandate but you don't think Nigeria should answer to the UK even though we were established by the British mandate.
You are confused.

Obviously you dont know the difference between a state with uncontested borders and a state in a state of war, over internationally created borders. Furthermore you dont understand the difference between the roles of the UN as a multilateral global body and that of a singular colonial authority. I have long since known you are dense, I will not worry myself. You are unteachable, which is the worst thing a teenage discussant such as yoruself can be.

Please make sure you take the meds and report to the psych ward by six a.m.

Otherwise we may have to deploy force to evacuate you from the streets.

DeepSight:


Obviously you dont know the difference between a state with uncontested borders and a state in a state of war, over internationally created borders. Furthermore you dont understand the difference between the roles of the UN as a multilateral global body and that of a singular colonial authority. I have long since known you are dense, I will not worry myself. You are unteachable, which is the worst thing a teenage discussant such as yoruself can be.

Please make sure you take the meds and report to the psych ward by six a.m.

Otherwise we may have to deploy force to evacuate you from the streets.

My boy. Nothing you have said explains your earlier stupidity or justifies your point.
Please read my question and stop being disorganized.
Let me ask it again since you are confused.
If the Jews don't have a right to their home after being forced out, why should your Arabs have a right to it.
Focus on the topic my child

DeepSight:


Obviously you dont know the difference between a state with uncontested borders and a state in a state of war, over internationally created borders. Furthermore you dont understand the difference between the roles of the UN as a multilateral global body and that of a singular colonial authority. I have long since known you are dense, I will not worry myself. You are unteachable, which is the worst thing a teenage discussant such as yoruself can be.

Please make sure you take the meds and report to the psych ward by six a.m.

Otherwise we may have to deploy force to evacuate you from the streets.

I am sure that when you created this thread you felt very smart not knowing it will take only one or two questions to make you feel stupid.
You Hamas gang act like you operate from the same brain.

tctrills:

My boy. Nothing you have said explains your earlier stupidity or justifies your point.
Please read my question and stop being disorganized.
Let me ask it again since you are confused.
If the Jews don't have a right to their home after being forced out, why should your Arabs have a right to it.
Focus on the topic my child

You cant seem to read. The key question in the OP was this -

DeepSight:


How long is a group required to dwell in a place before being considered indigenous thereto?

DeepSight:


You cant seem to read. The key question in the OP was this -

Loooool.
We both know you made a fool out of yourself and now you are looking for excuses.
Oga answer the question if dem born you well.
Why are the Jews not allowed back to their home after being forced out but you think the
Arabs have a right to the lands they lost.

tctrills:

Loooool.
We both know you made a fool out of yourself and now you are looking for excuses.
Oga answer the question if dem born you well.
Why are the Jews not allowed back to their home after being forced out but you think the
Arabs have a right to the lands they lost.

I have since stopped being befuddled by your sheer irrationality. It used to really shock me but not any more.

Now listen up. After the second world war, an international order was established. It was the first time you had the concept of international law actually existing. That international order had the United Nations as its centre and citadel. That organization created the legal framwork for the establishment of Israel through the British Mandate for Palestine.

Prior to this time, and throughout history, might was right. Anyone who could conquer another did so, and "rightfully" seized his land/ colonized him/ enslaved him and expropriated his resources. That was the law of the jungle under which mankind lived. It took the horrors of the world wars for humanity to say no to this, and set up the international community and the international legal order. From that time, it became, by consensus, legally unnaceptable for one state to seize the land of another state by force. This became an international crime.

This is why the Russian attack on Ukraine is legally unnacptable. This is why Saddam Hussein's attack on Kuwait was also unnaceptable. Other instances can be cited, but even you should catch the drift. That which formerlly obtained as the law of the jungle had been displaced. And legally so, for law is made by people and groups of people in concurrence.

As such, the wars which involved Israel and the Arabs, despite being fought, did not truncate that new international order. Nor did those wars banish the Arab population of Palestine - indeed not even Israel claimed so, so please school yourself properly. Israel claimed land, yes, and in some areas it returned lands it had claimed - for example, to Egypt. In no case was a banishment of the Arab population the result, so what are you saying? That simply never happened. Therefore your qustion falls flat on its face. It also is a non starter in light of what I have explained to you in terms of the law of the jungle (which operated at both at the sack of Jerusalem in 70 A.D and the time of the crusades which involved Saladdin - who, by the way, did not kick Jews out of Jerusalem) being replaced by the international order of the latter 20th century.

This answers your question in exact terms, and I neednt have had to explain it but for your painful ignorance and irrationality. I also have no doubt that the explanation will still be lost on you on account of your irredeemable fanaticism. So I only render it here for posterity and the the causal reader of my posts - and certainly not for you, for I know that would be a waste of time and energey.

DeepSight:


I have since stopped being befuddled by your sheer irrationality. It used to really shock me but not any more.

Now listen up. After the second world war, an international order was established. It was the first time you had the concept of international law actually existing. That international order had the United Nations as its centre and citadel. That organization created the legal framwork for the establishment of Israel through the British Mandate for Palestine.

Prior to this time, and throughout history, might was right. Anyone who could conquer another did so, and "rightfully" seized his land/ colonized him/ enslaved him and expropriated his resources. That was the law of the jungle under which mankind lived. It took the horrors of the world wars for humanity to say no to this, and set up the international community and the international legal order. From that time, it became, by consensus, legally unnaceptable for one state to seize the land of another state by force. This became an international crime.

This is why the Russian attack on Ukraine is legally unnacptable. This is why Saddam Hussein's attack on Kuwait was also unnaceptable. Other instances can be cited, but even you should catch the drift. That which formerlly obtained as the law of the jungle had been displaced. And legally so, for law is made by people and groups of people in concurrence.

As such, the wars which involved Israel and the Arabs, despite being fought, did not truncate that new international order. Nor did those wars banish the Arab population of Palestine - indeed not even Israel claimed so, so please school yourself properly. Israel claimed land, yes, and in some areas it returned lands it had claimed - for example, to Egypt. In no case was a banishment of the Arab population the result, so what are you saying? That simply never happened. Therefore your qustion falls flat on its face. It also is a non starter in light of what I have explained to you in terms of the law of the jungle (which operated at both at the sack of Jerusalem in 70 A.D and the time of the crusades which involved Saladdin - who, by the way, did not kick Jews out of Jerusalem) being replaced by the international order of the latter 20th century.

This answers your question in exact terms, and I neednt have had to explain it but for your painful ignorance and irrationality. I also have no doubt that the explanation will still be lost on you on account of your irredeemable fanaticism. So I only render it here for posterity and the the causal reader of my posts - and certainly not for you, for I know that would be a waste of time and energey.

So you are saying that any land taking before the UN came on board should not be given back right?
Is that your entire point because you are looking more foolish with your explanation.
If the UN hold all the power and decide who owns which land then why did your Arab bros reject Israel in 1948 and go to war in a bid to claim the land given to Israel by the UN?
Please answer this.
What did the UN do to protect thousands of Jews kicked out of the communities by the Jordanian government in the West Bank in 1948.
Did the UN sanction Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and co for kicking out over 800k Jews from their country?
Can you see that you are not making sense.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, how come no UN sanctions?
When China took over almost 10% of Bhutan's land, how come no UN sanctions.
When China took over Tibet, how come no sanctions.
Do you see you are not making sense?

How about Turkey taking over northern Syria. During Operation Peace Spring, Turkish Armed Forces and its allies captured a total area of between 3,412 square kilometres (1,317 sq mi) and 4,220 square kilometres (1,630 sq mi), and 68 settlements, including Ras al-Ayn, Tell Abyad, Suluk, Mabrouka and Manajir and cut the M4 highway.

tctrills:

So you are saying that any land taking before the UN came on board should not be given back right?
Is that your entire point because you are looking more foolish with your explanation.
If the UN hold all the power and decide who owns which land then why did your Arab bros reject Israel in 1948 and go to war in a bid to claim the land given to Israel by the UN?
Please answer this.
What did the UN do to protect thousands of Jews kicked out of the communities by the Jordanian government in the West Bank in 1948.
Did the UN sanction Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and co for kicking out over 800k Jews from their country?
Can you see that you are not making sense.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, how come no UN sanctions?
When China took over almost 10% of Bhutan's land, how come no UN sanctions.
When China took over Tibet, how come no sanctions.
Do you see you are not making sense?

I have told you what international law is, I have neither asserted that conflicts do not happen, nor that genocides and illegal occupations do not happen, or that international crimes and crimes against humanity are not committed. For heavens sake we had South African Apartheid until the 1990s.

You really suffer from a serious problem with common sense and basic understanding such that it is strenous trying to communicate basics to you. This is why I joke with you so much, because serious discussions with you are almost impossible and are always very painful on account that you are near retarded.

Your assumption that one has ever claimed the UN to be some school prefect or global policeman with any powers of enforcement of its own is so misfooted one does not know where to start. And that arose and stuck in your mind simply because I informed you that on the subject of its borders, the UN is instrumental to Israel on account of the role it played in its establishment.

You keep shouting that Israel is not bound by this, and not bound by that. Yes it is not bound by the ICC as it is not a party to that treaty, but it is certainly bound by the ICJ as it is a party to that. And yet it ignores the rulings of that. It has always ignored all rulings and violated all international law with impunity. And that is simply because it is assured of US backing. The day that goes, perhaps they will behave.

So you are saying that any land taking before the UN came on board should not be given back right?

And if this is all you derived from my explanation, then you are truly hopeless.

DeepSight:


I have since stopped being befuddled by your sheer irrationality. It used to really shock me but not any more.

Now listen up. After the second world war, an international order was established. It was the first time you had the concept of international law actually existing. That international order had the United Nations as its centre and citadel. That organization created the legal framwork for the establishment of Israel through the British Mandate for Palestine.

Prior to this time, and throughout history, might was right. Anyone who could conquer another did so, and "rightfully" seized his land/ colonized him/ enslaved him and expropriated his resources. That was the law of the jungle under which mankind lived. It took the horrors of the world wars for humanity to say no to this, and set up the international community and the international legal order. From that time, it became, by consensus, legally unnaceptable for one state to seize the land of another state by force. This became an international crime.

This is why the Russian attack on Ukraine is legally unnacptable. This is why Saddam Hussein's attack on Kuwait was also unnaceptable. Other instances can be cited, but even you should catch the drift. That which formerlly obtained as the law of the jungle had been displaced. And legally so, for law is made by people and groups of people in concurrence.

As such, the wars which involved Israel and the Arabs, despite being fought, did not truncate that new international order. Nor did those wars banish the Arab population of Palestine - indeed not even Israel claimed so, so please school yourself properly. Israel claimed land, yes, and in some areas it returned lands it had claimed - for example, to Egypt. In no case was a banishment of the Arab population the result, so what are you saying? That simply never happened. Therefore your qustion falls flat on its face. It also is a non starter in light of what I have explained to you in terms of the law of the jungle (which operated at both at the sack of Jerusalem in 70 A.D and the time of the crusades which involved Saladdin - who, by the way, did not kick Jews out of Jerusalem) being replaced by the international order of the latter 20th century.

This answers your question in exact terms, and I neednt have had to explain it but for your painful ignorance and irrationality. I also have no doubt that the explanation will still be lost on you on account of your irredeemable fanaticism. So I only render it here for posterity and the the causal reader of my posts - and certainly not for you, for I know that would be a waste of time and energey.

I have have answered you in my post above but to summarize your point, you believe that if I took your land from you before 1945 when the UN was founded, it's mine forever and you will be wrong to fight for it after 1945.
You keep getting more stupid.
So let's assume Nigeria stole land from Niger in 1944, in 1946, Niger will no longer have claims to that land under your law.
Do you think before your type?

tctrills:

I have have answered you in my post above but to summarize your point, you believe that if I took your land from you before 1945 when the UN was founded, it's mine forever and you will be wrong to fight for it after 1945.
You keep getting more stupid.
So let's assume Nigeria stole land from Niger in 1944, in 1946, Niger will no longer have claims to that land under your law.
Do you think before your type?

If this is what you got from my explanation you are truly hopeless.
Suffce to say this is not what I was communicating to you.

DeepSight:


I have told you what international law is, I have neither asserted that conflicts do not happen, nor that genocides and illegal occupations do not happen, or that international crimes and crimes against humanity are not committed. For heavens sake we had South African Apartheid until the 1990s.

You really suffer from a serious problem with common sense and basic understanding such that it is strenous trying to communicate basics to you. This is why I joke with you so much, because serious discussions with you are almost impossible and are always very painful on account that you are near retarded.

Your assumption that one has ever claimed the UN to be some school prefect or global policeman with any powers of enforcement of its own is so misfooted one does not know where to start. And that arose and stuck in your mind simply because I informed you that on the subject of its borders, the UN is instrumental to Israel on account of the role it played in its establishment.

You keep shouting that Israel is not bound by this, and not bound by that. Yes it is not bound by the ICC as it is not a party to that treaty, but it is certainly bound by the ICJ as it is a party to that. And yet it ignores the rulings of that. It has always ignored all rulings and violated all international law with impunity. And that is simply because it is assured of US backing. The day that goes, perhaps they will behave.



And if this is all you derived from my explanation, then you are truly hopeless.

My boy please answer my question. I asked what did the UN do and what was their position in the cases I mentioned above. Or does their law only affect select nations?
Let's look at the very recent case of turkey taking over northern Syria.
During Operation Peace Spring, Turkish Armed Forces and its allies captured a total area of between 3,412 square kilometres (1,317 sq mi) and 4,220 square kilometres (1,630 sq mi), and 68 settlements, including Ras al-Ayn, Tell Abyad, Suluk, Mabrouka and Manajir and cut the M4 highway.
Please why isn't there an arrest warrant for the president of turkey?
Go ahead and answer boy.

DeepSight:


If this is what you got from my explanation you are truly hopeless.
Suffce to say this is not what I was communicating to you.

That's your entire explanation. According to you, it was ok to displace the Jews before the UN but now the Arabs are protected by the UN.
As I said, you only get more foolish as we discuss.

tctrills:

That's your entire explanation. According to you, it was ok to displace the Jews before the UN but now the Arabs are protected by the UN.
As I said, you only get more foolish as we discuss.

I never commented on the morality of displacement of populations prior to the present international order. I commented on the legality as accepted. Let this sink in.