Metal detectors "encroach on Muslim rights" ??

[Augustus]

Didn't Arafat create this "Palestinian" identity out of thin air long after Israel was established? In other words, there never was a Palestinian National State, correct?

The same was true for countless anti-colonial movements, including your own. National identities are all created out of thin air based on attachment to a piece of land, it just depends when this happened.

The point is that the identity exists now. Unless you are denying it exists now, then why is it in the slightest bit relevant when it started?

 

[icehorse]

The same was true for countless anti-colonial movements, including your own. National identities are all created out of thin air based on attachment to a piece of land, it just depends when this happened.

The point is that the identity exists now. Unless you are denying it exists now, then why is it in the slightest bit relevant when it started?

You opened this line of discussion when you said it was based on a 70 year old conflict. When I mentioned that Arafat created the idea much more recently you said that when it started isn't relevant.

 

[Augustus]

You opened this line of discussion when you said it was based on a 70 year old conflict. When I mentioned that Arafat created the idea much more recently you said that when it started isn't relevant.

Would it make the slightest bit of difference to my point if it was 62, or 37 or 49 or 115?

You said that the opposition to the metal detector was something to do with Sharia or 'Muslim exceptionalism' about not wanting to walk through a metal detector (even though Muslims don't have problems with metal detectors in other locations or installed by different people).

I disagreed, and said it was really part of the ongoing conflict that can be dated back to the period surrounding the creation of the State of Israel. Since then, there have been ongoing disputes about ownership and authority between the 2 communities. It is much more about symbolism and who has the right to make such a decision (asserting ownership and authority over access to the site), than the actual product of the decision (a metal detector).

To repeat the analogy I gave to Luis:

"A good comparison for this would be the marching bands of the Orange Order. Many a riot has started over these because the Orangemen demand they should be able to take their 'traditional' routes, whereas the nationalists object as these 'traditional' routes often go through areas that have become nationalist due to demographic changes. Seeing this as a dispute about simply walking through a metal detector is like seeing those as disputes about flute music."

 

[icehorse]

Seeing this as a dispute about simply walking through a metal detector is like seeing those as disputes about flute music."

Most everyone in the world now has to go through hoops and walk through metal detectors for every flight they take. I know, we should all start violent protests against this encroachment on our rights!

 

[Augustus]

Most everyone in the world now has to go through hoops and walk through metal detectors for every flight they take. I know, we should all start violent protests against this encroachment on our rights!

Way to miss the point. Are they protesting against metal detectors in airports? Why do you think they are not?

Do you think the nationalist anger towards the bands of the Orange Order marching through their neighbourhoods is their objection to hearing people playing the flute? Or do you think it is something else?

 

[Augustus]

Most everyone in the world now has to go through hoops and walk through metal detectors for every flight they take. I know, we should all start violent protests against this encroachment on our rights!

Or to make it easier, if some random people put up a metal detector on your street and made you walk through it every day and decided whether or not they would let you past, would you be fine with that?

It's just a metal detector, everyone has to jump through these hoops after all. You'd be fine with that I suppose?

If it would make you angry though, is it about walking through a metal detector, or that you don't believe they have the legitimacy to force you to walk through it and decide whether or not you are allowed to proceed?

 

[LuisDantas]

I must be indeed missing the point entirely. I certainly fail to see it.

 

[Augustus]

I must be indeed missing the point entirely. I certainly fail to see it.

What would your thoughts be about the above scenario regarding random people forcing you to undergo security checks?

 

[icehorse]

What would your thoughts be about the above scenario regarding random people forcing you to undergo security checks?

It's already happening. I'm not happy about it, but I don't go around blowing people up.

 

[Augustus]

It's already happening. I'm not happy about it, but I don't go around blowing people up.

Which random people on your street make you do this?

 

[LuisDantas]

What would your thoughts be about the above scenario regarding random people forcing you to undergo security checks?

Random people force me to undergo security checks all the time. I have not threatened anyone for that so far.

What was I supposed to feel?

Edited to add: as a matter of fact, I have to go daily through a metal detector to arrive at my workplace.

It is a bother and I am not even sure that there is any benefit in doing it. I strongly suspect that it is only meant to give some people an appearance of importance.

I am still not about to threaten anyone for that, nor do I perceive it as imperialism of... "foreigners", I assume?

 

[icehorse]

Which random people on your street make you do this?

The TSA makes me do this. Security at some big buildings make me do this. In Jerusalem it's not "random people" and it's not "random people" in our lives either.

 

[Augustus]

Random people force me to undergo security checks all the time. I have not threatened anyone for that so far.

What was I supposed to feel?

The TSA makes me do this. Security at some big buildings make me do this. In Jerusalem it's not "random people" and it's not "random people" in our lives either.

For intelligent people, you are very slow on the uptake.

You accept legitimate sources of authority forcing you to do things. The point is you consider them legitimate, even if this is inconvenient to you. I assume you accept that security at airports is legitimate.

You don't accept illegitimate sources of authority telling you to do things. The point is you consider them illegitimate. You wouldn't accept your neighbour's 15 year old child telling you what you could or couldn't do.

So there is a difference between walking through a metal detector at an airport and being subject to their acceptance you can proceed, and being imprisoned in your driveway until your neighbours kids allow you to proceed.

Incase you haven't noticed, the Palestinians don't consider the Israelis legitimate sources of authority over the al-Aqsa Mosque (and much else). Just like the ANC didn't consider apartheid South Africa a legitimate source of authority, or the nationalists consider the Brits a legitimate source of authority in Northern Ireland, or the Viet Minh and the French, or the Mau Mau and the Brits in Kenya, or the East Timorese and Indonesia, or the Kurds in Iraq & Turkey, etc x10000.

 

[rosends]

If I recall correctly, this isn't about metal detectors in general, but about their presence as people go to pray so analogies to the presence of detectors in airports, malls and office buildings are not precise.
Metal detectors being set up in Dubai mosques

 

[LuisDantas]

For intelligent people, you are very slow on the uptake.

I'm fairly stupid, but I think that we just don't condone certain lines of thinking.

You accept legitimate sources of authority forcing you to do things. The point is you consider them legitimate, even if this is inconvenient to you. I assume you accept that security at airports is legitimate.

I think I know where this is leading...

truth be told, I don't think I even have much of a notion of legitimate authority. Leadership is a fascinating concept to me, because it is so artificial, so anthropologically-dictated.

You don't accept illegitimate sources of authority telling you to do things.

I don't know that there is such a thing as legitimate authority. There is only acceptance.

The point is you consider them illegitimate. You wouldn't accept your neighbour's 15 year old child telling you what you could or couldn't do.

That would be very situational, actually.

So there is a difference between walking through a metal detector at an airport and being subject to their acceptance you can proceed, and being imprisoned in your driveway until your neighbours kids allow you to proceed.

There is now? If you say so.

In case you haven't noticed, the Palestinians don't consider the Israelis legitimate sources of authority over the al-Aqsa Mosque (and much else).

Then I must assume they expect to be treated as adults and deal with the consequences, don't you think?

If they do not, I can hardly excuse them for that.

Just like the ANC didn't consider apartheid South Africa a legitimate source of authority, or the nationalists consider the Brits a legitimate source of authority in Northern Ireland, or the Viet Minh and the French, or the Mau Mau and the Brits in Kenya, or the East Timorese and Indonesia, or the Kurds in Iraq & Turkey, etc x10000.

How creative.

 

[icehorse]

For intelligent people, you are very slow on the uptake.

You sound like trump - thinking that this should be easy to resolve. Please, share your Israeli / Palestinian resolution plan with the world, we'd all appreciate it.

Incase you haven't noticed, the Palestinians don't consider the Israelis legitimate sources of authority over the al-Aqsa Mosque (and much else). Just like the ANC didn't consider apartheid South Africa a legitimate source of authority

Wow, you're going to have to explain how's there is ANY sort of equivalency here???!!

 

[Flankerl]

So the Metal Detectors and Cameras are no more.

And yet the Palestinians announced that they won't stop throwing a hissy fit.


Who would've thought that would happen? Most certainly not me or most Israelis.
Next thing you'll know Netanyahu will extradite the security guard from the Embassy in Amman because the Jordanians want him dead.

But hey giving in to their demands sure worked. Let's give them something else.

 

[Augustus]

You sound like trump - thinking that this should be easy to resolve. Please, share your Israeli / Palestinian resolution plan with the world, we'd all appreciate it.

???

If you explain why someone dies after being hit by a bus do you have to explain how to reanimate them also?

Re read my first post starting at *to be clear...

(or the later ones where it is in large red letters as saying to be clear wasn't clear enough)

Wow, you're going to have to explain how's there is ANY sort of equivalency here???!!

Interesting partial quote and spin to remove previous context...

The similarity in all examples was group A didn't see group B as legitimate authorities.

Remember, from the start, I've been talking about cause, not who is 'right'.

 

[Augustus]

I think that we just don't condone certain lines of thinking.

What line of thinking would that be?

I don't know that there is such a thing as legitimate authority. There is only acceptance.

This is quite interesting, in your opinion is there any difference between a manger asking an employee to perform a task, and a slave being told to perform the same task under threat of physical violence?

Both would generally lead to acceptance.

Or is there any difference between you forcing a stranger to get out of your house, or the stranger forcing you to get out of your house?

There is now? If you say so.

Most people would see a difference between the 2. Most people see airport security as a necessary evil, where being prevented from leaving your property by a neighbour would be seen as a gross infringement of your rights.

What makes you see them as being similar?

Then I must assume they expect to be treated as adults and deal with the consequences, don't you think?

In context, I've no idea what that actually means.

How creative.

Your response seems to suggest you missed the point.

It's just a list of groups who rejected the legitimacy of the authority of other groups.

 

[LuisDantas]

What line of thinking would that be?

Beats me. There is not any clear logic there.

This is quite interesting, in your opinion is there any difference between a manger asking an employee to perform a task, and a slave being told to perform the same task under threat of physical violence?

Do you expect me to answer "no"? What does this question has to do with anything?

Both would generally lead to acceptance.

And a bycicle and a 767 are both vehicles. So?

Or is there any difference between you forcing a stranger to get out of your house, or the stranger forcing you to get out of your house?

Will we eventually go back to discussing the situation in the Middle East?

Most people would see a difference between the 2. Most people see airport security as a necessary evil, where being prevented from leaving your property by a neighbour would be seen as a gross infringement of your rights.

And that would have to do with our subject matter because...?

What makes you see them as being similar?

You know what? Never mind. I don't want to encourage this game of pretend.

In context, I've no idea what that actually means.

Figures. You are set on the premise that Israelis must be perceived as oppressors, facts be darned.

Your response seems to suggest you missed the point.

If you say so.

It's just a list of groups who rejected the legitimacy of the authority of other groups.

And that, I assume, resembles the situation in Israel to you.

Feel free to tell me why at some point.