| "You seem to assume that I share your apparent view of Lincoln and Grant being evil people?" |
Nope, what you said was a good Muslim wouldn't mourn the death of the greatest "murderer" of Muslims. The brutality of the North during the civil war easily equaled Hussein, and has anyone been responsible for killing more Americans than Lincoln? Sherman is synonymous with a war of attrition against civilians, and yet they begged him to run for President AFTERWARD.
You just differ on "murder" and what it means. You blame the South, but the North baited the military conflict over an ideal, and broke peace agreements to do it. Grant, Sherman, Lincoln all would be considered war criminals now in my opinion. Yet, we celebrated their victories, and we mourned their deaths.
We celebrated the deaths of "japs" in WW2, we rejoiced when we heard the newsreels tell us the "kraut" body count. Good Christians? We make people like Richard the Lionhearted heroes and he had Jews KILLED.
Given we have photos of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Hussein and that the US funded HUssein during his largest effort to "murder" muslims... well, we have no right to condemn the Palestinians for being a little conflicted now, do we? When we opposed the Iranians he was our friend, too.
As for the word they use for "Palestine", I think I've pointed out it holds no water. I've asked you to point out the appropriate Koranic term and you can't, because there isn't one. "Palestine" was in use long before Islam came to be, so you really can't pretend it is a term that was used to harm Islam, or Judaism, considering Jews were using it too.