to Die in Jerusalem

The documentary “To Die in Jerusalem” showed and discussed the reality, which both sides live in. the idea of the movie in my opinion is to bring to humans all around the earth that killing is not the answer to solve any problems. In the beginning of the movie Rachel’s mother was talking about how she thinks that peace is the answer for everything, but we witnessed half way through the movie, when she said that she hates Palestinians, and she doesn’t love them, she just want to know if they knew about the incident. Also when the reporters mentioned that Ayyat’s mother is appealing in order not get her house demolished and we saw the reaction that Rachel’s mother gave, she was disappointed and she wanted the Israeli government to destroy the house. The movie had an idea, trying to figure out different ways besides killing in order to bring peace between Israel and Palestine, but we also have to remember, where ayyat’s family came from, Jaffa, which is a Palestinian city on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea, that was occupied by the Israel forces in 1948. Ayyat’s family forced to be moved outside their city, leaving them in dehacescha refugee camp near Bethlehem city, what wrong did they do in order for someone to take their land from them? Rachel’s mother had great point of view but at the same time, she wasn’t willing to admit that her government has huge rule of the killing of her daughter, think logically, what would make a human, sacrifice his/her live? Israeli army is killing Palestinians everyday up till now, and they not allowing Palestinians from the west bank to visit Jerusalem and the Dom of the rock, which is the third holy mousaq for Muslims. I was born in Jerusalem in 1987, I never killed Israeli, I never shot at them, but still they won’t let me in Jerusalem, because I’m Palestinian. Through the movie Rachel’s bother, asked a good question “I wonder what would’ve happened for Rachel if terrorism weren’t around”.

Ottomans

After understanding the article of “The Gulhane Proclamation (1839), it made me believe more in Islam. As the article discuss in the beginning the raise of the Ottoman Empire, and how they ruled their country with the laws of Koran, the Ottomans did give freedom to believe in any religion you would like to believe in, but at the same time, you have to pay taxes if you not a Muslim. For Muslims also it was the same way, but they don’t call it taxes, its just every Muslim has to donate 3% of his income to the poor citizens of the nation. Muslims and non-Muslims liked the idea because they saw that everyone was living a good life under the laws and regulations of Islam. I wouldn’t consider it democracy because you had freedom of choosing your religion, but not necessarily having freedom of speech, or gay marriage, etc. but at the same time, we won’t see any problem with the system, because if the country is being ruled fairly, I don’t think they should be need to go against the government. The Ottoman Empire had it’s glorious time, when they were under the Islamic law, and look what happened to them when they started become westernized. America has some similarities with the Ottoman Empire, but the same time, American government taxes their citizens in order to give aid to different countries, and that why people in this country are not satisfied with the taxing system that this country has, but you can that the Ottoman actually took money from the rich to give to the poor.