With the current furor over cartoon depictions of Mohammed, I’ve decided to take a step back and look at the big picture. Just how serious is blasphemy taken by some of the other major religions, and just how much respect is accorded other faiths by non-practicioners? (I figure as a repeatedly-self-declared agnostic, I am the closest thing to a disinterested party as there is around.)
Let’s look at some examples of blasphemous imagery, and see how they are handled:
First, there’s this cartoon I stumbled across a while ago. It is rankly offensive to two major faiths — Christianity and Judaism. But I have to admit I snorted at it. I even shared it with a select few (OK, just Laurence Simon), who said he was going to post it, but he never did.
How about stuff that’s pretty much guaranteed to offend Christians? How is that handled?
Luckily, we have two recent examples — Andres Serrano’s Piss Christ and Chris Ofili’s Madonna, made with elephant dung.
How did Christians react to these desecrations of their holiest symbols with bodily wastes? Yeah, there was a hue and cry. There may have been even a death threat or two. But the most extreme reaction I can recall by most people was a denouncement that these had been paid for with taxpayer money — THEIR money — and they were outraged over that. I don’t recall massive Christian riots over them, burning buildings and calling for death.
Judaism takes a bit more abuse. Partly because they’re a smaller group, partly because they’re much more in-your-face to the Muslim world, partly out of respect for historical tradition. But take a look at some of the anti-Semitic cartoons collected here, or this award-winning cartoon. Pretty extreme stuff, but again no major backlash.
Then there’s Islam.
The Ten Commandments, common to all three faiths mentioned above, says you shall not worship graven images. In Islam, this is taken to the extreme that one should not even create an image of Mohammed. And whether or not you believe in the tenets of Islam or not, they’re bound and determined that we shall all live by them.
Therefore, it is an unforgivable sin for ANYONE to draw pictures of Mohammed. Even non-Moslem cartoonists in a Western democracy, acting fully within their legal and moral rights — for the Danish government to tolerate that is, to much of the Islamic world, a declaration of war.
One of the basic tenets I learned in a class on ethics is that for any ethical system of beliefs to be acceptable, it must be universal. It must apply equally to all, or it is inherently unfair. So, by that standard, it seems that the governing principle underlying the Muslim outrage must be that one must respect a religion’s beliefs, even if you don’t ascribe to them.
And how does Islam rate on that standard?
Pretty shabby.
The Taliban, who I think we can all agree represented a very fundamentalist view of Islam, decided that its “no graven images” belief extended to two huge statues of Buddha in Afghanistan. And, with great ceremony and glee, they destroyed them — despite pleas from the world community, not just Buddhists.
In 2002, Palestinian terrorists fleeing Israeli military forces entered and occupied the Church of the Nativity. While the siege lasted, they repeatedly desecrated the Church and abused the Christian staff. And when they left, there were no apologies, no reparations — just celebrations that they had negotiated their way out, proclaiming it a great victory.
And let us NEVER forget the ongoing extermination of any signs of Jewish occupation of the Temple Mount, undertaken by the Palestinian Authority in contravention of international law and done under the color of “restoration” to the mosque built on top of the holiest site to Jews.
In Muslim nations, there is freedom to belong to another faith. As long as you don’t make a point of it. That means you can’t display any signs of your faith. You can’t build a house of worship. You have to pay a special non-Muslim tax. And if you get caught “attempting to convert” a Moslem (which could mean something as innnocuous as explaining your beliefs to a curious Moslem), you can be put to death.
That’s just for Christians. Jews have it even worse — when they’re even allowed entry into the country.
So let’s sum up: according to the Moslems, our Constitutionally-guaranteed rights of freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and all the rest are secondary to the tenets of a faith the vast majority of us simply don’t believe in.
I think not. The Golden Rule applies here: “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” If the Moslem world wants respect, it must be willing to give it.
I am reminded of a great quote from Mahatma Gandhi. When asked about his opinion of Western civilization, he replied “I think it would be a good idea.”
Modern-day Islam, I am sad to say, is reminding me more and more of contemporary gangs. So eager to answer any insult or challenge, incredibly prickly about their “rights” and “turf,” and so quick to resort to violence. The Danish cartoons were a “dis” on them, and they seem poised to go to any lengths to avenge that slight.
So what do I think of Moslem civilization? I think it would be a good idea — but I’m basing that purely on speculation, as I’ve seen damned little evidence of it so far.
Cuban-Bob:
I am not going to re-cast my argument regarding what the muslims did in the past. If you care to know about it go do a simple search on Islamic achievements.
The Arab conquest of Jerusalem was bloodless. Tradition has it that the Patriarch Sophronios surrendered the city to Omar, the commander of the Arab forces. In return the Patriarch was granted a writ of privileges which guaranteed the right of Christians to maintain their holy places and pursue their customs unhindered. Infact the Christians went on to help the muslims defeat the Romans in places like Egypt.
Besides I am not trying to justify anything contemporary because of the Crusades. All I am attempting to do is cast this issue in terms other than black and white. That Christianity has in the past quite effectively used militarism. The past is the past and we should look towards the future, on how we can learn to co-exist. And towards that more work needs to be done by the muslims themselves.
Israel is a post-colonial nation. My comments above specify in elaborate detail how (failure in sciences/social affairs) that might be possible in muslim countries. Besides countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, Pakistan, are pretty advanced in sciences. Not to mention muslims all over the world who are scientists in every conceivable country. Don’t always think that streets in their cities are strewn with donkey carts, as we almost often see in the news. The news media in the west has played such a negative roll in showing the complete picture.
Finally I hope the US moves towards Ethanol, then perhaps some of these resource rich countries might get a chance to effect internal change without external intervention into their affairs. Till then compliant dictators will rule over their people and serve the interests of others. Have you ever wondered why Hussein was so bad, and Hosni Mubarak, King of Jordan, Houes of Saud, Zia’s of Pakitan, Shurato of Indonesia, Emir’s of Kuwait, and other compliant dictators were fine and are to this day.
Rod though I agree with the premise that muslims should adjust their expectations when living in western societies, but there is a dicotomy here. As the second largest religios minority they have rights too. Even today millions of muslims in the west have absolutely no familial connections to the developing Islamic world. For them they were born in western countries now for multiple generations. In the US muslims have been hear for hundreds of years. So they are a part of the society. You cannot ask them just to wrap up and leave. It would be as asinine as asking Blacks to return to Africa. Though many racist people do often state such insensibilities. So muslims in the western societies are part of those societies whether you like it or not. And they have equal representation and civil rights as anyone. So get with the program. Besides I for one would protect my fellow western citizen in any part of the world. For most of us our religion is personal. Our societal contract is overt. There is no conflict in any muslim’s mind in living and loving the country (west) where they live. Of course there are idiots in every religion, sect or group. And muslims are no exception.
Now one other note Rod, you logic of lets hurt the feelings of muslims cuz they behead westerners is entirely convoluted. In the one hand you argue and rightfully so that beheading is crazy, then on the other hand you attempt to morally justify “hurt feelings” as acceptable given it is not as brutish as be-heading. Both are wrong in varying degrees. One does not make the other right.
Finally I am sorry to hear you are a hostage in your land. How so? Because someone gets up and says don’t say misguided hurtful things about another person’s prophet makes you feel like a hostage. Doesn’t make sense to me.
Ask the millions of innocent muslims living in these western societies how they feel. They have a lunatic fringe in countries miles away that untook a terroristic crime, only to leave these law-abiding productive members of their own societies extremely vulnerable, from hate by their own neighbours. Hate in terms of burning of their mosques, shootings, murders, beatings, unjustified questioning at airports, suspicion. All the while they had absolutely nothing or care about none of this stuff. And you feel you are a hostage.
TomB again you take a thread and make an out of context assumption. Nowhere did I argue that Islamic culture is superior. My points were simply reflective providing a counter point to someone who was arguing that Islam never provided anything positive to the historical narrative. Again historical – as in history/past. Western civilization has for hundreds of years given much postive to the human race. I could not even attempt to put that down it is so far encompassing.
My point is simply guys, we can shout at each other till we go blue. Or we can listen to each other and realize that we today live in too small a world not to figure out how to make things work. I would hate to see my kids raised in world at its throat. The points I am trying to raise is to give those of you who care about a just and peaceful world and alternative context to the “black and white” view. We are all more educated than that. And yes people are rightfully angry as I am at much that goes on and is justified under the guise Islam. But it is not Islam that justifies it. It is often the local cultures and traditions that are passed off under the guise and umbrage of Islam.
When you ridicule a person’s religion outright, and when you approach any discussion with a basic premise of self-righteousness, then you are not trying to learn but teach. And the best teachers are often those that do a lot of learning/listening.
This Islam versus West is crap. It will unnessesarily drag down the west (my homeland) into a long protracted battle that will eat up her resources, polarize her societies, and speed up her economic and social demise (racism, islamophobia, xenophobia). All the while civilizations like the Chinese will thrive and effect a power imbalance.
Muslims are a pretty down-drodden lot. They have absolutely nothing to loose. It is the West that has the most to loose if it does not deal with this situation in a the most prudent and artful fashion.
Just take my words for what they are my opinions.
Oh btw Ivy-league education highly over-rated and over priced…. 🙂
OneDrummer: To your query why muslims in the US don’t rise up and say this/that in the name of islam is wrong. First and foremost many do, we just don’t care to listen, cuz it serves our worldview.
In one of the course I took in college we studied how as people we seek and read and consume information that already supports our views, not the contrarian view. And funny enough that is exactly what I did, until I consciously began to change my process of consuming information. And it is tough. One always wants to go down the route of the well know and not let other point cloud it. That is how we operate as humans.
Which is why I think we just dont listen to the other person when we are so charged.
On this same note: I for one would never be an apologist for the actions of any Saudi or Egyptian terrorist. Reason is simply I have almost as much in common with a person from Saudi/Egypt as an American would have with someone from Yugoslavia. Nothing. Therefore guilt by association, and collective stimatizing is wrong and unfair. Though on the same note if someone were to hurt the US, attack her, or my fellow citizens regardless of their race or religion I would fight. Not for any reason but the simple motivation that I would be protecting my home and my family. Those associations are far stronger than any.
OnDrummer on the note why you are not allowed to prostelize in countries like SA. Prostelizing is not an in-alienable human right. If we expect others to respect us we must respect them, and the surest way to kill any conversation with a person is to say you are going to enternal damnation if you don’t believe in Christ. It is their law and their country we must respect that. The same way no one will give a damn about a fatwa passed in Iran in any western country, we cannot reverse it around either. Now when it comes to other issues in SA I think we are perfectly justified in raising those issues. For example freedom of religion. Freedom to practise whatever religion you belong to. Women rights, minority rights, enhancing education, removing anti-semitism etc. We should question those and will be right when we do that. The same way we should question anyone among us here in the US or in any other western country who say “kill all ragheads”, or “send them all to Guantanemo” etc.
So before we all long like I said outside the window, lets all of us look at the mirrors.
TomB care to elaborate on how a person like me is the western cultures greatest mistake. I hope you don’t come up with the cliche’ leftist/apologist hypothesis.
Another viewpoint on this CARTOON debaucle:
What Would Jesus Do?
By Remi Kanazi
02/04/06 “ICH” — — Picture this: A cartoon of Jesus, with his pants down, smiling, raping a little boy. The caption above it reads “Got Catholicism?” Or how about a picture of a Rabbi with blood dripping from his mouth after bludgeoning a small Palestinian boy with a knife shaped like the Star of David–the caption reads “The Devil’s Chosen Ones.”
I wonder if people around the world would just consider this free speech? Of course, some would condone or agree with one, two or all three, while others would say “it’s free speech,” although they “find it offensive and in poor taste.” But do you honestly think media outlets such as the BBC, Le Monde, or any media outlet in Copenhagen would pick up these cartoons? The outrage would begin instantly and advertisers would pullout. Yet, those in Denmark and their supporters around Europe call it freedom of speech to have a cartoon of the prophet Mohammed–who is not supposed be depicted to prevent idolatry according to clerical interpretation of the Koran–with a turban shaped like a bomb on his head.
The double standard the West has set for the rest of the world is disgusting. We live in a foolish bubble where we think we are free to say or do whatever we want without consequence. I remember watching Saturday Night Live when Sinead O’Connor ripped up a picture of the Pope. The furor was enormous, which led to NBC receiving a 2.5 million dollar fine by the Federal Communications Commission. Imagine if it was a picture of Jesus–the US Congress would have made the Teri Schiavo intervention look like a joke.
Where are the pictures of the dead soldiers, the dead women and children in the Western media? Some governments won’t allow it and other media outlets just fear the backlash. When I need journalistic honesty, I have to turn to Al Jazeera, why is that? One cannot even deny the Holocaust in Europe, question 9/11 in America (unless you want the Ward Churchill treatment), but the West claims they’re all about free speech.
It is no coincidence the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is grossly pro-Israeli. It is no coincidence that you never heard the full quotes of Iranian president Ahmadinejad’s comments on Israel and the Holocaust–no matter the basis. And it is no coincidence that Arab analysts who are against the war in Iraq, the occupation of Palestine, and America’s “war on terror” are insufficiently represented in the European press.
So what are Muslims to do? Violence is out of the question–that would be “an overreaction.” So why not boycott? That would be a mistake as well, according to the European Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini who stated, “Calls for boycotts or for restraints on the freedom of the press are completely unacceptable.” What Frattini meant to say is that Muslims should choose capitalism over faith. Maybe the European Union will clarify through a cartoon–Mohammed selling the Koran for ten bucks in a Danish pawn shop. But boycotting is a friend of the West. However, they more conveniently title it “sanctions.” I’m sure we all remember the 500,000 Iraqi women and children that died because of the UN boycotts on Iraq after the first Gulf War.
Is Europe is willing to continue this new trend against boycotts? Will the European community call on Israel to show Paradise Now in non-independent theatres? It’s the only way to stop the boycott of Palestinian freedom of speech. Will the European Union resume aide to the Hamas-led Palestinian government tomorrow? Since Hamas’ call for the destruction of Israel is protected under the clause of freedom of speech and the group stopped suicide attacks 18 months ago, it only seems logical.
If Denmark, Norway, France, Germany and the rest of Europe believe in the freedom of speech, it should include all instances and all religions. These nations are carelessly defending their hypocrisy and reinforcing the double standard that alienates Muslims and desecrates the Muslim faith, under the guise of free speech. I guess only one question remains for small Norwegian Christian newspapers like Magazinet that reprinted the cartoons: What would Jesus do?
*** Remi Kanazi is the primary writer for the political website http://www.PoeticInjustice.net. He lives in New York City as a Palestinian American freelance writer and can reached via email at remroum@gmail.com
With regard to the comment that ‘Islam is a religion of hate and intolerance’ please remember that many wars and acts of aggression have been initiated and sold to the public under the premise of doing ‘the work of God’ by nation’s leaders. Some of those instances happened quite recently..
“What people conveniently avoid and put aside is that Islam or Islamic empires were not raping or plundering the Christians. It was the Crusades that first brought to Islamic shores an evil ideology of hatred based upon religion. Ask any muslim to say anything negative about Christ or Moses, and you won’t get many respondents. The contrary is often exemplified as in the case of the cartoons.”
Actually what people forget is that the First Crusade was a cry for help from the Byzantine Emporer because Islamic forces were about take his empire. For centuries the Byzantines kept the Western door to Europe closed to Conquering Islamic forces.
This is why Islam spread across North Africa and Only North Africa. They took the path of expansion along the Mediterranean’s Southern Coast to enter Europe from the West. In fact they took most of Spain before loosing their Imperialist steam. If Islam was interested in just plain converting people, why not go into Southern Africa?
The First Crusade was a response Islamic Imperialism. The Europeans did something extremely clever with their relatively inferior forces. They took advantage of the fact Islamic forces did not have naval forces worth a darn. That allowed Europeans to insert themselves into what amount to the belly of the Islamic Empire, Jerusalem. This forced a redeployment of Islamic forces away from their expanding borders.
Granted many exploited the opportunity war gave them for plunder which was more true in later Crusades. But, there may have never been a modern Christian west without the first Crusade. Many people don’t know this. Our Anti-Western schools in action.
Denny:
Archie Bunker eh?
Your response to my post was pretty damned reasonable, and it represents a view I’ve tried to hold since 9/11. I’m struggling, but losing my grip on it.
I hear you man.
I’m nearly ready to join the anti-Islam mobs as a result of the daily examples of absurdity emanating from the world’s mosques. I hate to admit it, but bigotry is moving into my soul–and it seems increasingly justified by recent events.
I completely understand. I just try to remember that this information is only a part of the puzzle. Here in the states, where we have a much open media, we have people like Falwell and Robertson…So when I see Muslims acting like psychopaths, I try to remember the fact that what I am looking at is a specific group, and I do not assume that everyone agrees with them. Remember, it’s not going to make good news to show a bunch of everyday Muslims going about their lives and NOT acting like this. News and media are selections from reality, and can be true, but they are not always representative of what is going on as a whole.
As for the E.B. White thing, that was hyperbolic. As far as I can recall, the British government banned all images of pigs from government offices to show sensitivity to Muslims (as a result of their idiotic demand). Elements of Style is permitted, but Charlotte’s Web is out. Beanie Baby pigs are out. The government offices are pork free. I’m no pork fan, but that’s asinine!
I didnt think it was law, but I remember hearing about it. Pretty over the top if you ask me. I dont see how a picture of a pig on a book could cause someone such emotional stress, and I think in that case the Muslims could suck it up and look the other way. Crazy.
I do want to congratulate you on your reasoned and respectful arguments, even though I’m tilting the other way at the moment.
Thanks. There are times when I dont know why I do this, at all. So thanks for saying that. Sometimes I see my fellow Americans getting so enraged that I think their vision gets a bit clouded, and to me thats scary. I think that we need to maintain our rationality, and try to understand the entire situation, instead of hauling off and creating bigger problems.
But people, especially on this site, really misinterpret what I’m saying when I start talking about this stuff. They think that I’m saying we should just be all fuzzy and feel good and roll over and let terrorists do whatever they want. But thats the last thing I’m saying.
My point is that we should stick to finding and prosecuting people who have committed crimes, along the lines of our legal system. I DO NOT think that condemning the entire Muslim world for what specific individuals and groups are doing is the way to go, at all. That just makes more problems, and creates more enemies.
When a murder occurs, the police arrest suspects and do all they can to find the perpetrator. Sometimes they make mistaks and arrest the wrong guy, it happens. But the rhetoric that I hear from people on here is akin to the a police force mowing down an entire neighborhood because one guy in there is a murderer. I vote that we go after the murderer as efficiently as possible, and steer clear from assuming that all of the surrounding neighbors are murderers as well.
Dude, I’m a freaking windbag. Sorry for the long post. Thanks for being cool, and for listening to what I’m saying. It’s really appreciated, trust me.
jpm100 I think you should re-read some of the above comments I have made. In one of them I have specifically stated that Crusades were critical for the Italian Renaissance to happen. However that does not detract from the fact that the Crusades were an un-provoced attack on Muslims, Jews and Christians living peacefully in Jerusalem. Did you know that even the Christians living and practising their religion in the holy land were not spared, even those in the Christiandom’s holiest sites.
Not to mention as the crusader came across the anotolian penninsula they murdered raped and plundered the coptic and Orthodox lines of chrisitandom.
Additionally your history is way off on the first Crusade being a call by Byzantinum emperor. It wasnt’. The call began as a way to unify the christians in Europe who were involved in an internicine war against each other. Pope Urban thought channeling this hatred towards muslims was a better way to handle this internal european issue. So quite similar to the Nazis saying the Jews are to be blamed for everything. Urban did the same hundreds of years prior to muslims.
The first, which all four sources mention, is the cessation of hostilities between fellow christians and the unification of Christendom. Fulcher of Chartres reports Urban as saying “Those who once waged war against their brothers and blood relatives should fight lawfully against barbarians (Riley-Smith, 1981:42)”. Robert of Rheims account comments on Christians fighting each other and advises “Stop these hatreds among yourselves (ibid:44)”. Guilbert of Nogent chronicles Urban as chastising Christians “thus…you have often savagely brandished your spears at each other in mutual carnage only out of greed and pride (ibid:46)”. Finally Baldric of Bourgueil narrates Urban as declaring “you butcher your brothers and create factions among yourselves, appealing for them to unite as knights of Christ (ibid:51)”.
So hopefully we will put to bed a revisionist view point on the crusades.
BTW Urban artfully used the burning down of a major Church (which was fully rebuilt by the muslims after an apology), as the lincpin upon which we instigated the masses to support his first Crusade.
You are mistaking me for another poster. Here is my comment:
Am I the only one who finds it almost stupefyingly ironic that Kasihf brags about the superiority of Islamic culture while using his WESTERN Ivy League education to uphold his bona fides?
Short and simple, unlike others around here.
You brag about the superiority and advances of the Muslim world, yet you must come to the west for your education. I wonder why?
I honestly hope that some of you guys take the time to actually read through what Kashif is saying here. It is a point of view that you may not completely agree with, but I think it’s important to understand different perspectives here.
Kashif wrote:
On this same note: I for one would never be an apologist for the actions of any Saudi or Egyptian terrorist. Reason is simply I have almost as much in common with a person from Saudi/Egypt as an American would have with someone from Yugoslavia. Nothing. Therefore guilt by association, and collective stimatizing is wrong and unfair.
The past is the past and we should look towards the future, on how we can learn to co-exist. And towards that more work needs to be done by the muslims themselves.
So muslims in the western societies are part of those societies whether you like it or not. And they have equal representation and civil rights as anyone. So get with the program. Besides I for one would protect my fellow western citizen in any part of the world.
My point is simply guys, we can shout at each other till we go blue. Or we can listen to each other and realize that we today live in too small a world not to figure out how to make things work. I would hate to see my kids raised in world at its throat. The points I am trying to raise is to give those of you who care about a just and peaceful world and alternative context to the “black and white” view.
And yes people are rightfully angry as I am at much that goes on and is justified under the guise Islam. But it is not Islam that justifies it. It is often the local cultures and traditions that are passed off under the guise and umbrage of Islam.
Main point: maybe we should take the time to listen to one another more. Maybe this situation is more complicated than being Islam vs. the West. Hating all Muslims, just by association, is only going to make things worse for us, PERIOD. Honestly, I am confused as to why some people want to hang onto their hatred so much. I see a lot of people, on both sides, doing that, and it is pretty horrible.
There is no justifying what happened on 9/11. That was murder. There is no justifying suicide bombings in Iraq, or anywhere else. Again, murder. And we should do all that we can to find and punish the individuals/groups that committed those crimes.
On our side of the fence, there is no justification for hate speech, for condemning MILLIONS of people for what specific people have done. Why incite MORE violence? What good does that do? I understand the fact that people are angry, upset, and scared by what they see. But lets not lose our minds and become EXACTLY WHAT WE FEAR by letting hatred determine our actions.
Read or listen to the words of your president people. He makes it clear that we are not fighting against Islam, which he calls “a noble faith,” but instead we are fighting against radicals who have hijacked that religion.
yes we all remember “piss christ” and Sinead O’s tirade on SNL. We all remember the pubic uproar over whether tax dollars should be used to subsidize such things as “piss Christ” and the millions of complaints phoned into NBC regarding O”Conner’s stupidity and the subsequent finebny the FCC. Im not a fan of the FCC fines I think they are silly. But thats where it ended. NO riots in the streets, no calls for murder or death or destruction. So there is no double standard.
Sure we have our own religious hotheads in this country. Pat Robertson and Jerry Fawell and Louis Farakhan, and their like. But how many beheadings have you seen on the 700 club? How many times has Fawell led his congregation in a good old fashioned barbaric riot? How much of Washington DC was burned down during the Million Man March? the answer to all three is of course ZERO.
TomB:
You brag about the superiority and advances of the Muslim world, yet you must come to the west for your education. I wonder why?
Oh get off it Tom. He was not bragging about the superiority of the Muslim world, he was trying to bring up examples of contributions that have come from it. That was in response to someone who was saying that nothing of value has come from the Middle East.
Did you read everything he wrote, or did you just skim through and then react? For Christ’s sake, try to read and understand the person’s point of view before jumping all over them.
The guy has plenty of good points, and is writing in a respectful way. You dont have to agree by any means, but try to listen at least.
However that does not detract from the fact that the Crusades were an un-provoced attack on Muslims, Jews and Christians living peacefully in Jerusalem.
The part about unprovoked is crap. It was still the same empire that was attacking Byzantium. The part of attacking Jews & Christians is debatable and more likely a blurring of following crusades.
People are using too many words and brain cells now! Can’t we get back to the emotional core of this thread?
Fuck ’em!
Fuck ’em!
Fuck ’em!
Hey Denny is that…humor?
I’ve heard of that before, I think.
lol
Did you read my reply? It’s way up there, somewhere, along with my lost brain cells.
I honestly hope that some of you guys take the time to actually read through what Kashif is saying here. It is a point of view that you may not completely agree with, but I think it’s important to understand different perspectives here.
It’s a point of view based on ignorance, bigotry, and flat-out lies. For example, the claim that Holocaust was motivated in the least by Christianity. Hitler’s Naziism was paganist/atheist; the anti-semitism was primarily based on racial theories popular among “progressives” of the day. Hitler held Christianity is as much contempt as he did Judaism, and devout Christians were on his list to be purged.
As for the Crusades — the surrender of Jerusalem was peaceful because other cities had fallen in baths of bloodhed. The surrender was intended to avoid a blood bath, which the lions of Islam had shown themselves entirely capable of.
The Crusades were not a violent response to peaceful expansion. They were a violent response to violent expansion.
But, hey, that’s not the important thing. When the majority of Muslims — peaceful, moderate, completely compatible in habit and philosophy with the Western world — stand up against the radical minority, then we can all agree on what proportion are radicals. Until that moment, well, either there aren’t that many moderates, or they’re just not that interested in resisting the radicals.
-Ryan, I commend you on your rational thoughts and feelings about it the situation. However, I believe that you have a pre 9/11 mindset. This is no longer a legal issue but a military situation. We are in a War. We have been since 1993, and probably even earlier than that. Yet, between 1993 and 9/11/01 our nation treated these thugs and terrorists as you suggest now, as a legal matter to be given a trial and punished. That type of thinking gave us 9/11. We are beyond that. We need to take the war where they are and end it as much as humanly possible. The purpose of government is to protect the lives of its citizens. If our government does not do that, then it has abrogatted its duties and responsibilities to its citizens. I voted for W. I would have voted for another candidate who would have been even more determined to carry the war into states that sponswer terrorism. Until those individuals and states that sponswer terrorism are extinguised this battle will continue to rage. Europe is finally reaping the whirlwind of multiculturalism without assimiliation. That whirlwind will get far worse before it gets better, and that is truly unfortunate.
Guys I have written in exhaustive details some counter points. Please read them before jumping to conclusions. And don’t parse them without context, or implicitlly believe that this “brownie” is deviant and means us harm. Such irrational fears kill conversations. Pure and simple.
All I am saying is there is no historical moral supremacy, and though we can argue about who is better than the other, both sides are pretty bad. I maybe biased but my understanding of history and geo-politics lends to believe that we have played a far better job at RealPolitik than the folks from the Islamic world. And those of you who are students of politics understand what that means.
Second, get off this issue “ragheads”, kill all muslims rubbish. There are far too many (in practical terms), and the world is way too small for there not to be a significant blowback, resulting in a MAD like scenario. It serves no side.
Finally you have to understand what is happening globally to perhaps begin to put things into perspective.
Almost 15 years ago I wrote a paper on an impending clash with the Islamic world. Having studied there and grown up I had a better than average understanding of this bottled up aggression that was building up in the Islamic world. My Poli-Sci professor considered my views too far-fetched. I wonder if he would remember that conversation.
Anyways here is what I believe is happening or going to happen in the next 15 years. The Western world first and foremost is not a monolithic whole, and I hate it when someone says that. There are differing viewpoints here as well as there are in the Islamic world which in-itself is not a monolithic whole. If the 1.4 billion muslims in over 50 countries began to think and operate as a monolithic whole things would be quite different.
But anyways before I digress on this tangent let me state what I consider to be the current state of affairs and where I think things are going to progress:
In the very small power groups of the world, primarily in the western countries of US/UK/France/Germany there is an internal struggle on how to define and maintain economic and military supremacy for the next 100 years. They all have different approaches on how to handle that. Some want a more aggressive overt flexing of muscle akin to colonial days. Others want to bridge gaps and accept the changes as inevitable with more distribution of wealth and power around the world. There are varying interest groups all vying to be heard, from religio-fanatics, neo-cons, Zionists, Liberals, Libertarians etc. All viewpoints are struggling to get there interests maintained. In the process we have developed an incoherant policy that makes no sense. On the one hand we’ll bomb everyone even our allies in Pakistan, but on the other hand they are critical in helping us and liking us. Haha. Does anyone every think how that is going to be possible. People all over the world are generally rational. You kill them one day and say you love them the next is not going to work. Therefore my point about the incoherance of our policies.
The reason for this massive shift is fundamentally pegged with the economy. It is all about the economy. Western economies just don’t have the numbers, and this is a well known secret worry of all geo-political scientist in the western world. The power shift is inevitable. In the next 30-40 years you’ll have the Indians and Chinese (both with significant muslim populations) dominating the world economic and political sphere. They will just spew out more PHDs, and MSc than we ever could. There are attempts by western powers to manage and control their growth, but it is turning out to be impossible. India maybe will be managed and controlled in the short term, but China is certainly out of the picture, and India too will begin to assert herself in due course.
This massive shift will impact western economies in incredible ways, and the competing powerhouses in Europe (France/Germany) will adopt a co-optive role vis-e-vis the US. They all are subservient to their own constiuencies. However there is a group that is harking on the baser ideals that the Western ideals or moral supremacy allows for the usurption and in a way exploitation of other reasources purely on the basis of this moral supremacy of our political doctrine. That could have worked in the early days of our colonial historical past, but not today, when resources are further strapped and even colonial powers require to out-do each other in order to maintain their powerbase. Beoing vs. Airbus, and so on. Add to this mix the Chinese and the Indians and things get more murky.
Hence in order to co-opt an inevitable degredation of quality and standard of life and its potential polarizring and debilitating impact on the western societies, we’ll see laws be enacted under the pretext of things like terrorism. Again historical analogy is self-evident. The native is here, the chinaman, the black, the commie. Fear equals submission. Submission allows for laws like patriot act and others limiting freedom of expression etc. Also allows for “long wars” in other people’s lands. As we have seen on numerous occassions sold to masses as some moraliztic “crusade” always has some other underline reason. These attempts will fail as the other side will exploit this to their benefit. Not to mention capital will naturally oppose this.
I for one as a muslim american feel fundamentally that the america of our ideals is the best system in the world, and one we must fiercely protect. But I am afraid this very system is being eroded. We are but a shell of our ideals, and it makes me sad.
In the end I feel what is bound to happen is that reactionary forces and baser elements and short sighted goals will win out, pitting us and casting us forever as a foe to Islam. People like TomB and Rod will win out. On the other side the reaction will be as cuastic and their ilk like TomB and Rod will win out too.
In the end we’ll expend time energy, treasure effort to fight a mindset. Such a war is lost even before it begins.
It is this time lost that will cast us forever in the west into that turning point when the “barbarians” constantly attacked the periphery of “Roman” empire. Chipping away at it. Giving competing power bases the ability to grow, thrive and challange.
We are at that point, unless we realize this. But I guess history has a nagging ability to repeat itself, even when self-evident.
Finally guys we are today subserviant to the most powerful political and economic force, that never existed in its current form (in our past), and that is capitalism as exemplified in capital. Capital flows where there are maximum returns. Our economies and our jobs will fly off the handle into far away lands. It is a matter of time, and time is not on our side.
World is small. Getting smaller by the day. Capitalism is breaking away borders and everything else in its way. To support this argument, I wanted to tell you guys about a project that I worked on, where our Chinese hardware manufacturers were working for a German company, that had hired Pakistani software developers and were marketing the products in the US. When working on that project I had the most sleepless time in my life as all timezones intersected. When the Chinese were about to call it the day the Pak were working on their problems, soon the Germans were ready with their issues and then here in the US the day began.
It is this incredible force of capitalism that we must understand. All of this stuff we talk about is meaningless. Where we live is meaningless. Nationalistic jingoism is meaningless. Cultural supremacy ideals ring hollow.
One man/woman with his or her productivity value. That is the currency of the future. Nothing else.
Hopefully I haven’t bored too many with me views.
Also the Crusades were started becuase they were an attempt by the Eastern Orthodox Byzantines to try to heal the Schism of 1054 with the Roman Catholics. Alexius Commenus only asked for some Knights to assist him in the containment and reconquest of the lands lost to the Seljuk Turks after the disastrious battle of Manizkert in 1071. Instead Alexius received at Constantople one of the largest armies fielded by Europe. Which had its own motives and agenda quite separate from the goal of Emperor Alexius.
Robert:
Ryan, in your response to me nearly every aspect involved Iran, Iraq and maybe the PA/Hamas. That does NOT address the issues of the Muslims in the Phillipiness killing foreigners, that does NOT address the bombings in Bali or other places in Indonesia or the Civil War in Sri Lanka or the Conflict between Mulims and Hindus in India/Pakaistan/Bangladesh. Nor does it account for the situation in Sudan, the former Soviet Union territoris or Lybia.
Look, those were just a few examples. I admit that I might have to do some research about the government of Indonesia, but I do believe that democracy is less than prevalent there as well. Pakistan: Ever heard of Mushareff? Well, a few years back that dictator took over by military coup. Not a democracy. Sudan: horrible internals warfare, and also not a democracy. Thousands of refugees too. Former Soviet Union: not exactly the bastion of freedom either. If you think so, please disagree. Lybia: not a democracy.
Take a look at all these examples, and let’s look for some common denominators when trying to understand where terrorism comes from. Lack of democracy, high rates of dictatorial rule, years of warfare. Hmmm.
Now, I know that this shit is happening in Europe as well, and that cannot be explained by the lack of democracy. I would say that what we have there is the radical contingent spilling over into the west and spreading their message. I think we should deal with them directly, as we should deal with all terrorists directly. And we should not assume that every Muslim, out of about a billion, agrees with the violent and hateful rhetoric.
I do think that American Muslims and others in the west could do a lot to diffuse this tension. But then, are we listening to them? I dont know.
Like I said. Islam is PART of the cause. Recently Hamas came out and published an article stating that Seville (IN SPAIN) should be returned to Muslim Rule becuase it was once under Muslim Control.
More accurately: Hamas’ USE of Islam is part of the problem. You’re assuming that there’s some inherent evil trait in the religion, and I dont see it. When the KKK invokes Christianity, it would be erroneous to state that Christianity, as a belief system, is the problem. The USE of Christianity, by the psychopaths, is the problem. Same goes for Islam.
Where is the G-d damned moderate Muslims protesting this crap? All I hear are crickets chirping away.
I understand that point loud and clear. But how about this: maybe if we werent equating them all with terrorists there would be a more open dialogue. Hmmm?
,i>There is no peaceful resolution with any Muslim who believes in Jihad or believes that all territories that were once under the control of Muslims need to return to Muslim control.
Agreed. But dont assume that they ALL think this way.
Let’s stick to the criminals, and try to save room for the idea that many Muslims are caught in between. Let’s try to do our best to sort out the innocent from the guilty. Thats my take.
Robert Crawford:
I guess I need to be exact in what I was saying. I really don’t nor does anyone else know what was in the minds of Neo-Pagan members of the Nazi party nor Hitler. For all I know they hated Chrisitanity and intended to wean Germany off the Churches.
However my point was not to get into those specifics. I meant to argue that Nazi Germany used Chritian relgious symbology and wrapped Chritian teachings as a means to sell their ideology to the masses. That is the fundamental point I try and make. That religion and ethnic and racial politics are the fastest easiest way for people to consume what is otherwise a more complicated doctrine.
Do I blame Pope Urbane for Crusades I. No anyone who sold “one way tickets” to heaven or burned non-Christians at the stake is hardly a christian. So one cannot blame Chrisitanity, but the people who used it to rape, and plunder.
Hope you understand what I was trying to say.
BTW even contemporary Aryan ideals are deeply set in religious indoctrination. I certainly hope for the sake of intellectual honesty you would not argue that atleast.
Thanks.
TomB,
You know as an American Muslim I did not have much of a choice of where I studied. You see I alone did not decide to study in a Western educational system.
My great-grandfather came to California at the turn of the Century. Not this one. The last one!!!
You would never know what I have done for this country so before you begin to question anyone’s patriotism I do caution you sir, at your expense of sounding quite ridiculous.
Sorry if I caused any offense.
can we all agree then that one must subordinate deeply held religious beliefs for the sake of civility? Thats what radical Islamists must do if they are ever to be treated or thought of as anything other than savage barbarians.
American Muslims are fine. They ARE American citizens and while we may disagree on this or that we all for the most part respect one anothers right to agree and or disagree. I appreciate Mr Ahmad’s opinions even though I may not agree with all of them. But I am quite certain that there is nothing Mr Ahmad could say to incite me to violence and likewise there is nothing I might say to cause him to act out violently. Thats the difference between us(muslim, christian, jewish, non beleiver) in the West and them(savage barbarians) in the Islamic world.
Whether all Muslims in the Middle East are supporters of Jihad and or terrorism is irrelevant. The fact is that there are enough who do support such shenanigans to justify the various governments in that part of the world to play upon those feelings for their own purposes. So in dealing with the likes of Syria, Iran, Saudi and such we cant allow sentiments such as “well not everone over there hates us or supports jihad” effect how we act.
Johnny O I totally agree with you that the social contract we all sign as citizens far out-weighs any deeply held religious beliefs. Besides following your religion as long as it does not infringe on others rights and the concept of a Republic called the US are not opposing forces. Therefore Muslims in the US thrive and succeed, and though many question from time to time our “EXTERNAL” policies they will never nor should they ever consider hurting the fundamentals of our country.
On the other note: we must be careful that our policies do not push the majority of people in the Islamic world over the presipice (sp).
We should allow freedom of thought and expression in those countries. Don’t you find it ironic that these same countries where people are going bananas would crush with brutality any expression of change in the form of governance.
In Egypt people disappear, are killed, tortured, exiled you name it, if they question how a military dictator runs and exploits the nation for himself and his group of close associates. Yet this same government allows for cartoon type riots. I hope you understand where I am going.
The problem is not that the muslim world has too much to say, it is that they often don’t have enough. A repressed societies often become dysfunctional, and that is what they are at the end. You mix in illetracy, poverty, and hopelessness and you suddenly have a incredibly explosive mixture that is easily beguiled by dictators and politicians with personal agendas furthered through religious masking.
johnnyO:
Whether all Muslims in the Middle East are supporters of Jihad and or terrorism is irrelevant.
I disagree. I think it is incredibly relevant. And I have a feeling that GW might as well.
So in dealing with the likes of Syria, Iran, Saudi and such we cant allow sentiments such as “well not everone over there hates us or supports jihad” effect how we act.
Tell that to Bush, then. You tell him that it doesnt matter whether or not a group of people supports Al Qaeda. Tell him that it doesnt matter whether or not they support terrorism, it just matters that they are A)Living in the Middle East and B)Muslim.
Your reasoning would be like police going into a hostage situation and saying, “Hell, it doesnt matter whether the hostages want to be there or not, light the building up boys!”
And yes, the whole hostage analogy is pretty good for the current Middle East situation. Dictators abound, democracy doesnt.
Kashif wrote:
In Egypt people disappear, are killed, tortured, exiled you name it, if they question how a military dictator runs and exploits the nation for himself and his group of close associates. Yet this same government allows for cartoon type riots. I hope you understand where I am going.
Good point there. I hope people read that one.
Kashif,
It is so wonderful to me to read your well educated responses to these ignorant bigots. I am a 51 year old woman who is married and divorced from a Saudi man. We share a wonderful daughter (no he did not kidnap her) her has been raised here in the United States since she was two. She is now 27 and has had to endure her burdensome share of bigotry on both sides of the divide. Her father and I have tried to raise her to be tolerant of everyone and their beliefs as long as those beliefs are not harmful to others. Personally, I have had to put up with the racist comments concerning marrying a man who is well educated and much more tolerant than those who hurl the insults. You are doing a great job defending Islam and trying to educate those who are responding to you, but I think it is a hopeless cause. It does not help that these people are responding simply by hurling insults at you. You are acting with great dignity and I admire you for that. I only wish that some of those people responding to you would stop to think that thinking up ways of insulting you or your beliefs is only showing THEIR intolerance, the very thing they are accusing you and all Moslems of. Let’s stop this hatred swirling back and forth. And remember the old adage, “The only person you can control is yourself”. So wake up all you people who can only resort to hurling insults at Kashif and realize that he is trying to hold a dialog, one that respects all aspects. Maybe you should all take a step back and realize that you are sounding more like the “radical Islamists” than you might realize.
Robin
Hi, Kashif.
First off, I’m a convert away from Islam. I became a Christian. Even though I am living in the US, should Muslims be allowed to execute me?
Second, your history is way off. But it is quite common: Muslims are fed the same historical garbage that they consume and repeat without question. The same in Muslim lands: I lived in Pakistan for most of my youth.
You accuse Christianity of perpetuating gross inhumanities. True. People have abused Christianity. Yet this is nothing compared to what Muslims have perpetuated over the centuries.
War: In Islam, a jihad may be waged only in defense of Islam. What were the Arabs defending when they spread the Islamic empire over north Africa, the Middle East, and eastwards into Asia? Why did they try to conquer Eastern Orthodox Byzantine? Why did they try to conquer Christian Europe? Even though the religion of Islam did not spread under the sword, the realm of Islam certainly did.
Slavery: Most of the slaves sold were pagans. Guess who sold them. That’s right: Muslims. Muslims ran the slave trade, selling the slaves to the Europeans. When the Ottoman Caliph, under pressure from Europe, was thinking about abolishing slavery, Muslim experts rose up in loud protest. Muslim experts wanted to keep slavery.
Women’s rights: Nowhere in Christianity or Judaism are female circumcision or honor killing permitted, let alone commanded. Yet Muslims continue to subdue women, depriving them of equality and rights. I have heard Muslims often state that women are equals to men in Islam, but this is simply ridiculous. Women are not equal to men, and it is said so, explicitly, in the Qur’an (which, by the way, tells husbands to beat their wives if the husbands believe the wives may be disobedient).
Renaissance: Indeed, the Muslim empires were somewhat responsible for the Renaissance. But what did Muslims do, exactly? They preserved relics from the past, which European reembraced and improved upon. Muslims preserved, that’s it.
For the record, Hitler and the Nazis were adamantly against Christianity. Various Christians, especially Jehovah’s Witnesses, were sent to the extermination and concentration camps for asserting Christianity. Nazis sold Nazism under pagan, nationalist, and fascist symbolism and imagery. The swastika, the eagle, runes, even the colors were all taken from pagan civilizations. They never used Christianity. I say this because I have studied Third Reich Germany, and feel it is important to make you aware how skewed your conception of history is.
Also, if you read history, you will also realize that the great Islamic empire existed for only a short time, before breaking up into pieces. At one point, Muslims lived in a number of large empires. In others, there were a number of realms. Besides, the Caliphate is a dictatorship: all rule under one ruler. Would you be willing to say that this is something that was good for the various ethnicities? When the Caliphate was in Iraq or Syria, the language of the government was Arabic. Arabs dominated over and ruled various ethnicities. Then the Caliphate moved to the Turkish lands, where the language of the government was Turkish. Turks ruled over Arabs and other ethnicities. Let us not forget Persian-speaking Moghuls over Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Zoroastrians, and Jews of various languages. (And the best “Muslim” Mughal emperor was Awrangzeb, who brutally supressed and opressed Hindus. Akbar, the best Mughal emperor, was declared to be a non-Muslim because of his tolerance.) Also, you would realize that the entire history of Islam is full of violence. Islam has had its inquisitions, too. Execution of heretics, massacres against heterodox Muslims (Shias by Sunnis, Sunnis by Shias, Sufis by both).
Let us leave history behind: What have Muslims and “Muslim civilization” done in the recent past that is of renown? Nothing. Muslim realms are in such corruption and lethargy. And don’t give me any “they’re left behind” garbage. If you’re Muslim, you believe God will determine your rise or fall, so you cannot blame the West or anyone else. I refuse to believe any people is so in the thrall of another power that they cannot do anything to better themselves. People need to realize that self-development will lead to social development, that they must not demand to be raised by someone else.
Islam is a very intolerant religion. In the US, you Muslims want to have your cake and eat it too. You speak out against America, the government, the people, the culture, the law. You go so far as to disseminate anti-American literature and agitate others to go on jihad against America. And yet when the government wants to put an end to your anti-American activities, you cry “Foul!” and weep over your civil rights, which you would not hesistate to take from others. You mock and spread lies about Christians, Zionists, and Jews, but when people openly criticize Islam, you raise your voices in ear-deafening clamor.
Islam is just as fundamental to you as our religions are to us. To assume Islam is any different is to be severely mistaken. My Christianity is just a part of my being as Islam is to you. Does this mean I should be burning down Muslim embassies for mocking my faith and perpetuating lies about my religion?
Sadly, it seems you are not aware of what exactly the Qur’an, sunnah, ahadeeth, and shari’ah say. You would realize that your straddling of East and West is prohibitted in Islam, that the “extremists” are actually right. The Salafis are attempting to restore Islam according to how it was practiced and mandated by the salafiyun (Sahaba and Tabi’un and others shortly thereafter).
Many Muslims know this. That is why they are not opposed. How can a Muslim oppose the Salafis when what they say and do are amply justified and supported by the Qur’an, sunnah, ahadeeth, and shari’ah? Deep down, Muslims know that these so-called “extremists” are right.
Open your eyes, Kashif. See reality as it is and was. Leave behind the lies that have clouded your mind, and see Islam as it really is. I know too many people who blind and dumb to reality – family friends and relatives, everywhere. It almost looks like some sort of mental disease.
Robin: You evidently have not been exposed to true Islam, Islam as it was preached and taught and practiced for centuries, before modernity caused Muslims to become lax in orthodoxy and orthopraxy. There are plenty of lax Muslims in Saudi. An over-abundance of hypocritical Muslims too. (My father works with Arabs, and has had extensive dealings with Saudis.)
Stop lecturing us about Islam, and go read an accurate book on Islam. The “extremists” are not extremists. They are reformers who are attempting to return Islam to its original teachings and practices. This is most clear to anyone who studies them. And they command greater popularity and support than you may imagine.
Muslihoon:
You wrote:
You accuse Christianity of perpetuating gross inhumanities. True. People have abused Christianity. Yet this is nothing compared to what Muslims have perpetuated over the centuries.
Nothing compared to what Islam has done? Wow even the most fervent respondents on this blog will find that hard to consume my friend. Let’s talk facts, not feel good tales. Besides I am time and time again making a single case. That religions themselves are used by people to further their own more worldly goals. Christianity, Judiasm and Islam, Budhism and Hinduism are fundamentally beautiful ideas. All of them are more about humanity that anything.
You wrote:
War: In Islam, a jihad may be waged only in defense of Islam. What were the Arabs defending when they spread the Islamic empire over north Africa, the Middle East, and eastwards into Asia?
Why does any party to a war undertake a war? For political and economic gains. Does the hundred year war in Europe between the English and the French, the Napoleanic wars, The Boer Wars, The Indo-China Wars, The Abroginial Wars, The First World War, The Spanish-Mexican War, The Phillipense War, The Second World War, The War against the Incas, The Second World War, The The First Crusade, The Second Crusade, The Third Crusade, and on and on make the Europeans or Christianity evil? By your logic we could apply this lesson to the Western world given their incredible proclivity to kill and murder others in wars.
You wrote:
For the record, Hitler and the Nazis were adamantly against Christianity.
Just by saying it doesn’t make it so. I think I have exhaustively made my view on this clear. The Nazis may have been fundamentally anti-Chritianity. However they artfully used it to rally their people. Also how do you think perfectly good Christian germans managed to support the Nazi party and its evil against the Jews. Here is an excerpt from a paper written on this topic.
“A popular image of the Nazis is that they were fundamentally anti-Christian while devout Christians were anti-Nazi. The truth is that German Christians supported the Nazis because they believed that Adolf Hitler was a gift to the German people from God. German Christianity was a divinely sanctioned religious movement which combined Christian doctrine and German character in a unique and desirable manner: True Christianity was German and True German-ness was Christian.”
You wrote:
Islam is a very intolerant religion. In the US, you Muslims want to have your cake and eat it too. You speak out against America, the government, the people, the culture, the law. You go so far as to disseminate anti-American literature and agitate others to go on jihad against America. And yet when the government wants to put an end to your anti-American activities, you cry “Foul!” and weep over your civil rights, which you would not hesistate to take from others. You mock and spread lies about Christians, Zionists, and Jews, but when people openly criticize Islam, you raise your voices in ear-deafening clamor.
My friend you have an incredible amount of hatred. Just incredile. Not becoming of a good Christian. I am sure life would have been rough as a convert to Christianity especially in muslim countries, and I wish you would have embraced some of the truely beautiful elements of Christianity, but it seems like you are going the other route. Your decision to convert is your personal decision, I cannot pass judgement on it. Who am i to do that, but your words regarding American Muslims is way off field, xenophobic to the point that your arguments become a little incoherant and debased. I hope over time you’ll get over this deep seeded hatred. In terms of speaking agains the government that my friend is a very American thing to do. As our constitutional and founding fathers believed as I do, that governments inherently covet power. A power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We should work with our governments but most importantly stay true to the constitutional fundamentals of this great nation.
You write:
Sadly, it seems you are not aware of what exactly the Qur’an, sunnah, ahadeeth, and shari’ah say. You would realize that your straddling of East and West is prohibitted in Islam, that the “extremists” are actually right.
This one above really made me laugh. The irony is incredulous. I as a muslim am not aware of the Quran, sunnah and Sharia. But you are. OK!!! I’ll pass on this one.
Well on a final note, I will let my own actions, beliefs and treatment of my fellow man judge me in this life and once we pass on. I will not absolve myself of my sins and will be held responsible for what I do by God. I just hope I can squeak through. As in the words of our prophet Christ “Let he who among us has not sinned cast the first stone.” I live with that premise as a muslim.
You see muslihoon: as a muslim the sky can go green, and the cows can fly over the moon but I would never ever cast aspersions on Christ his word and that of Moses or any other prophet. You on the other hand can go bananas regarding Mohammad and have not the slightest bit of guilt. I have always found this situation a little bit interesting. I don’t know if you will ever understand what I mean.
Robin, really I never write on BLOGs or forum etc. But don’t know what got into me. I think it was seeing Ryan struggle with this, that I figured I could give him just a little bit of comfort that there are some (majority) like us who hear and see and understand the pain and conflict, because we too are going through it.
At the end of the day it was only for Ryan.
Too right, Muslihoon, too right.
Also, let’s remember that the lands the Crusaders were “invading” had been conquered by the sword over the preceeding 4 centuries, and began when Constantinople pleaded for help before they were over run.
You see muslihoon: as a muslim the sky can go green, and the cows can fly over the moon but I would never ever cast aspersions on Christ his word and that of Moses or any other prophet. Kashif
Then you are a better man than the Muslims that blew up the Bhuddist statues in Afghanistan. Or the ones that desecrated the Church of the Nativity. Or the ones that destroyed and built over the Temple of Soloman. All in the name of Allah and His prophet, Muhamed.
That you understand Islam to be peaceful and willing to co-exist is nice, but compared to the history of Islam and the current actions of much of the Islamic community, it is only a faint glimmer of hope.
Then again, there is a certain encouragement and approval in the Koran regarding lying to the infidels…
SCSIwuzzy wrote:
Then again, there is a certain encouragement and approval in the Koran regarding lying to the infidels…
Really there is? Wow I have been leading a really wrong life. Oh man, may God forgive me.
BTW for my edification I would love to know where exactly in the Quran is it stated that we can lie?
Or was your “certain encouragement” the classic say something while not saying it Orviellian speak?
SCSIWuzzy, people like you are scary. Pure and simple.
SCSIWuzzy:
I hope writers to this BLOG take your words with strong exception.
I myself wrote in my paragraphs above before any one about the buring of the Chruch of Nativity and how that was used by the Pope to rally the first Crusades. The burning is a well know black spot on Islam. The Church was re-built by the muslims and given back the Christians after apologizes. No one was killed in the burning down of the church when it happened.
Now where SCSIWuzzy losses his credibility is that in his paragraph he speaks one truth but gives two lies. The first lie is that in the Quran is it encouraged to lie to infidels. First and foremost Christians are never called Infidels in the Quran. They are called people of the book (ahl’e Kitaab) who need to be respected. Infact it is stated in the Quran, as a muslim you must respect that religion so much so that if you marry a Christian you must allow that person to practise their religion freely, even if it means you must help that person go to their place of worship. Go figure.
Secondly SCSIWuzzy lies yet again when he says that Muslims razed the temple of Solomon. That act was undertaken by the Romans well before Christianity or even Islam ever came on the horizon.
Like I said SCSIWuzzy, people like you scare me. No purpose but to lie in order to divide. I see no redeeming quality to such actions. Nothing positive.
As far as the Taliban blowing up the idols. That groups itself is representative of a small nutty fringe that even within itself was incredibly conflicted with that decision. This is well known and they were lobbied by many muslim groups to not undertake this action. Also the fact that those idols remained untouched for over 1400 years speaks to nothing I guess.
I’ll say again my friend scary. I hope life will give you some other purpose rather than the one you sow today.
1. My comments about war were not that Christians are not evil but that Muslims are not so good. Muslims take great pride in the spread of the Islamic realms in early Islam withou realizing it was an imperialist exercise.
2. I do not speak as a Christian here. I mentioned my former allegiance to Islam so that you won’t decry me as an outsider who’s xenophobic; I mentioned my current status so as not to mislead anyone to think I may still be a Muslim. I speak what I have experienced as an insider in Islam.
3. You said: “I as a muslim am not aware of the Quran, sunnah and Sharia. But you are. OK!!! I’ll pass on this one.”
Kashif, mera bhai, zara mujhe batadijiye – have you read Muhammad ibn Wahhab? Uthaymeen? Sayyid Qutb? Hassan al-Banna’? Mawdudi? How many tasafir have you read? Have you studied what the Qur’an, sunnah, ahadeeth, and shari’ah say about jihad, ahl adh-dhimmi, women’s rights, blasphemy, apostasy, tolerance of religions other than Islam? Are you aware of the differences between Sunni fiqh and Shia fiqh with regard to these issues? Have you read literature in English, Arabic, and Urdu?
If you are not familiar with these – and I am – how can you say you can speak for Islam instead of just your interpretation of Islam?
Kashif says: “Infact it is stated in the Quran, as a muslim you must respect that religion so much so that if you marry a Christian you must allow that person to practise their religion freely, even if it means you must help that person go to their place of worship. Go figure.”
Which ayah? Whenever someone says “The Qur’an says such-and-such,” I demand they produce proof. Which ayah?
I myself wrote in my paragraphs above before any one about the buring of the Chruch of Nativity and how that was used by the Pope to rally the first Crusades. The burning is a well know black spot on Islam. The Church was re-built by the muslims and given back the Christians after apologizes. No one was killed in the burning down of the church when it happened.
-Kashif
I’m talking recent history. When militants took the Church of the Nativiyy over, terrorized the occupants and defecated on the shrines and altars. I don’t recall the Pope calling for a Crusade over that…
As for infidels, aren’t all non-Muslims infidels? People of the book is just a division of infidel. If this isn’t true, why do the clerics in Iran and else where refer to infidels so often?
However, early in the Koran, before Muhamed was rejected by the Jews and Christians, he spoke somewhat highly of them. This is where many get the quotes about love and peace between Islam and the peoples of the book
Sura 5:82 which says, “You will find that those who are nearest in love to the believers [Muslims] are those who say, ‘We are Christians.'”
But when the Jews and Christians didn’t take to Muhamed as the new prophet, the tone changes (seems he didn’t like being persona non grata in Mecca, so he shuffled off to Medina. Where he told his own tribe that it was OK to worship the 3 daughters of Allah. That detail got cut out in later revisions of the Koran)
Sura 5:51 commands Muslims not to take Jews and Christians as friends.
Sura 9:29 commands Muslims to fight against Jews and Christians until they either submit to Allah or else agree to pay a special tax.
Sura 2:65-66 and Sura 5:60 contain references to Jews as “apes and swine to be despised and rejected.”
Sura 4:34 says, “Men are the managers of the affairs of women . . . Those women who are rebellious — admonish them, banish them to their couches, and beat them.”
Sura 9:73 which says, “O Prophet, struggle with the unbelievers and hypocrites, and be harsh with them.”
Fight in the way of Allah . . . and slay them [the unbelievers] wherever you find them and drive them out . . . and fight them until . . . religion is for Allah (Sura 2:190-193).
Fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war (Sura 9:5).
Fighting is prescribed for you, and [some of] you dislike it. But it is possible that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and you know not (Sura 2:216).
The Koran also expresses an intolerant attitude toward any person who decides to reject the Islamic faith or convert to another religion. Such persons are to be executed (Sura 9:12). In the Hadith (the oral tradition of Muhammad’s sayings) it says “Whoever changes his religion, kill him” (Hadith 9:57).
Sura 5 contains the following command: “Take not Jews and Christians for friends . . . He among you who takes them for friends is one of them . . . Choose not for friends such of those who received the Scripture before you [Jews and Christians] . . But keep your duty to Allah” (verses 51, 55, 57). Extreme intolerance is commanded in Sura 5:33 — “[For those who do not submit to Allah] their punishment is . . . execution or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet, from the opposite sides, or exile from the land.”
BUt maybe I am reading Koran wrong. I don’t speak Arabic, for example, maybe there is a nuance I am missing. I’m using this version today, since I am away from my home and lack hardcopy: http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/
But then maybe this gent is reading it wrong too: Al Ghazzali (1058 – 1111), one of the greatest Muslim theologians, wrote: “Know that a lie is not wrong in itself. If a lie is the only way of obtaining a good result, it is permissible. We must lie when truth leads to unpleaÂsant results.”
The Koran on revenge: “If anyone transgresses . . . against you, transgress likewise against him” (Sura 2:194).
The Koran commands MusÂlims to fight non-Muslims until they exterminate all other religions, leaving Islam as the one and only religion in the world (Suras 2:193 and 8:39)
“Strike terror (into the hearts of ) the enemies of Allah and your enemies” (Sura 8:60).
“I will instill terror into the hearts of unbelievers. Smite them above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them. It is not you who slay them, it is Allah” (Sura 8:12, 17).
When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. –Koran 9:5 (verse of the sword)
Now, I’d like to hear how you decode these Surrahs(and Hadith). If we disagree, I won’t call you a liar. I leave that kind of bull to you.
Muslihoon, care to add your thoughts?
Also, Kashif, interesting coincidence that you share the same name as the young man that sued Denmark for discrimination not so long ago.
Is yours a common name?
Muslihoon,
You say I have “obviously not been exposed to true Islam”. There one of you guys go again. Just like with Kashif, not asking questions but assuming things you know nothing about. Yes indeed, I have been exposed to “true Islam”.
I was married to a Saudi man for nine years and lived in Saudi Arabia for five of those years. Indeed, during those years I WAS exposed to “true Islam”. It was however between 1975 and 1980, prior to the fundamentalist takeover of Iran. When you make this statement you make an accusation before getting your facts straight. It would be the same as saying, “You have not been exposed to ‘true christianity’ unless I homeschool my children and eschew celebrating halloween”. There are lax Moslems as you may call them and then there are fundamentalists. You cannot just heap all Moslems into only pile in order to sustain your arguement. During those five years I lived with my inlaws who regularly prayed five times a day, went on pilgramages and practiced ZAKAT (charity). I was also exposed to a culture that was open and accepting of me as a Christian. How can you say this is not “true Islam?’ Every religion has adherants of different demeanors and levels of education. My ex-husband has his master’s degree and was the single largest personal contributor to the Tsunami relief in Sri Lanka. Why? Because it is part of his religion to give to others in need. My ex mother-in-law is the single most giving person I have ever known, accepted me and my family and continues to welcome me into her home even after our divorce. Is this because she is not a “true Moslem” or is it because Islam has made her the person that she is? You really seem to have a problem and just because your father “works with Arabs” I don’t think that gives you the right to go slinging mud. That really is the problem here. Alot of you people are slinging mud against Arabs because it suits your arguement. Yes, I am sure that many people have had problems with Arabs (that really goes without saying). But in that same light, plenty of Arabs have had their fair share of problems with Westeners. Just as you wish to be accepted as an individual, you should be willing to extend this courtesy to others. Remember, you can surely attract more bees with honey than with vinegar.
I find nothing funny in these insulting cartoons and I believe only prejudiced and stupid people will find these cartoons something to laugh about. This whole episode is a demonstration that freedom has limits and does not exist in a vacuum. One must be sensitive and utilize common sense especially when launching unprovoked insults, as these cartoons are. Dont complain of a response if you have attacked someone.
Kashif,
I apologize if my last blog seemed to criticize you when I said, “just like Kashif”. What I meant was that these people are hurling insults at you without getting their stories straight. Many blogs ago, someone wrote, “Where is the Moslem Ghandi or Martin Luther King”. Well unless they are and Indian Hindu or American black, how can they make this rediculous statement. God does not judge us by what others of our religions do, but by our own deeds. This is true of any religion. None of you guys can keep on hurling insults at eachother without submitting your own personal deeds. Who really cares what happened during the crusades, the Islamic Empire in Spain or the World Trade Center for that matter accept that these are things that we should learn from and try to make a better future out of them. None of us, Christian, Jew, Moslem, Hindu or Atheist are without the mistakes AND good deeds of our forefathers. It does ABSOLUTELY no good to attack another’s religios beliefs. Pointing out someone’s faults does not negate their good, as does the opposite tact. When all of us, around the world can realize that it is not what others do, but what we do ourselves, then each will be held responsible. That goes for everyone. As for the Moslem convert to Christianity, Muslihoon, would you please get off your holier than thou pedestal and realize that you made a personal decision for yourself based on your own needs and preferences. Behave as your prophet Jesus would and portray Christians as loving people. Or does it suit you better to be right and everyone else is wrong!
Where can I find an image of the cartoon with Muhammed with a bomb in his turbin? Why don’t you post it?
Robin, please not at all. I had absolutely no doubt where you were coming from. And I thank you for adding something positive to this discourse.
Peace.
Robin, I am the one who posted where is the Muslim equilivent of a Ghandi or a Dr. King. And, I hate to say it…but if you are looking at just the Race issue then, boy you are just pitiful. I am talking about the sense of the man. The man of peace in a world of violence. There is no Muslim Man of Peace. Dr. King consistently preached nonviolence. If the Palestianian thugs actually practiced non-violence instead of violence they would have already had a two state solution. Instead Arafat preached war. Hamas Preaches War. Islam preaches War from its very founding member, Muhommad who had to fled Mecca to Medina and came back to conquer Mecca. Your religion is one based on conflict, adversity and war. The wars of expansion against Persians and the Byzantines were just apart of the phase of wars. Until there is someone who embodies the spirt and character of a Ghandi or Dr. King within the Muslim community. Someone with the strength of character willing to stand up to the thugs who currently seem to be the predominate forces behind Islam I will have to continue to assume that Islam is a hostile religion that possible needs extinction.
I have been following this conversation for several hours now and am quite intruiged by the way in which Robin, Kashif and others are apparently misunderstaning the comments being made in response to theirs. It seems to me that neither Muslihoon nor SCSIwuzzy (nice tag!) are being intentionally insulting or intolerant but are in fact stating the case as they see it. If you disagree with them, fine, disagree and explain why, but don’t accuse them of insulting you when they merely disagree with you.
I agree with Muslihoon and SCSIwuzzy for the most part so this may bias me a little but I don’t see that Kashif has been intentionally insulting either. Condescending, yes, closed minded, yes again, but not insulting.
Robin – With regard to your earlier comment “Or does it suit you better to be right and everyone else is wrong!” (Which, by the way, is somewhat insulting in its own right.) Christianity claims that Jesus is God, Islam claims that Jesus is not God. These beliefs are mutually contradictory, if one is true the other cannot be true. So in a sense, from his perspective, Muslihoon must either believe he is right and Islam is wrong or he must water down his faith. What would you have him do? What would you have yourself do in his position?
Do I condone the cartoons? No. Do I condone the violence in response to these cartoons? No! Would Christian’s respond similarly? No! We have been insulted similarly and even more so yet our protest has never risen to the level now seen in the Islamic community.
Peter:
Me condescending?
Close minded?
Wow. I have tried my best to go the other route. But anyways you are welcome to your opinion. The utility of this blog for me has ended. My comments in it are on record for anyone to refer to.
However before I leave (though I might comment in brief) I would like to say:
Also with respect to Mohammad (warlike) popular Western sentiment is quite opposite to the narrative muslims are taught about him. For a man who came in to a brutish society of internecine tribal warfare, killing of girl babies, treating women as property, he brought ideas of stopping tribal divisions, giving women the right to property (1300 years prior to the western world), divorce, and contractual obligation at point of marrige, stopping the tribal customs of killing girl babies, forgiving all those who asked for forgiveness. We were taught that he even avoided stepping on insects if there were in his way. That he once did not wake a cat that was napping on his “shawl” of sorts during a cold night when someone came to see him.
Yet he was a realist, and if his people were in danger he made it obligatory for muslims not to sit on their hands but rally in just response. He defined rules of conduct of warfare that were beyond rare for those times.
Funny you mention Ghandi and King. Both contemporary figures and more a function of modern multi-culturalism than anything else.
Perhaps we should go further back to a great Western figure Winston Churchill, who said the following about your other great Ghandi figure:
“a half-naked fakir” who “ought to be laid, bound hand and foot, at the gates of Delhi and then trampled on by an enormous elephant with the new viceroy seated on its back”
Finally you don’t have ownership over Christ. You can make him out to be whoever you choose, but his greatness is not yours to usurp he is for all humanity. As muslims he is ours as much as he is yours. Try for a moment to understand that.
True you have made him God and we haven’t and in those terms you have certainly elevated him to level we are not prepared to for our own fears to contravening something fundamental to us (oneness of God).
Finally people have in the recent responses begun throwing singualr lines of Quranic verses. Though I don’t in anyway positively affirm that what has been shown above as factual. However I would like to state on record that grabbing singular lines out of context, with no preceeding lines and post lines makes such references highly dubious.
We can find incredibe lines in the Bible as well quite ill towards non-believers (Jews in particualr), not to mention the rapture and slaughter of most non-believers, but that to me as someone who was taught in Catholic schools is contravening what I have learnt to love and respect about Christianity. For me to do that would be intellectually dishonest and michieveous.
With these comments I will end my input into this BLOG. I thank Ryan and Robin for their support. I wish peace to my other Christian and non-Christian friends, and I hope they would understand and accept at the least one basic fact that is indisputeable.
The world is too small for us not figure this out. And that we need to step slightly out of our shows to see the other’s viewpoint. Let us not be so self-righteous, we are at the end of the day humans.
my last para has a spelling mistake.
“SHOWS” should have been shoes.
Thanks and goodbye.
Kashif (sorry if you don’t stick around to read this):
You said: “Finally you don’t have ownership over Christ. You can make him out to be whoever you choose, but his greatness is not yours to usurp he is for all humanity. As muslims he is ours as much as he is yours. Try for a moment to understand that.
True you have made him God and we haven’t and in those terms you have certainly elevated him to level we are not prepared to for our own fears to contravening something fundamental to us (oneness of God).”
In response I will say that I, nor any other Christian made Jesus out to be God; He did that Himself. It is the very reason the religious leaders of His time wanted to kill Him.
At the end of the day I remain a human, thanks be to God that through Jesus I am saved from the consequences of that reality.
My apologies, I forgot the word “neither”
Kashif (sorry if you don’t stick around to read this):
You said: “Finally you don’t have ownership over Christ. You can make him out to be whoever you choose, but his greatness is not yours to usurp he is for all humanity. As muslims he is ours as much as he is yours. Try for a moment to understand that.
True you have made him God and we haven’t and in those terms you have certainly elevated him to level we are not prepared to for our own fears to contravening something fundamental to us (oneness of God).”
In response I will say that neither I, nor any other Christian made Jesus out to be God; He did that Himself. It is the very reason the religious leaders of His time wanted to kill Him.
At the end of the day I remain a human, thanks be to God that through Jesus I am saved from the consequences of that reality.
Apologies, have not read every blog in etirety, some are a bit too long. A couple of points though.
Regarding history of crusdaes etc. always open to interpretation, so fairly bollocks quoting to be honest.
For me the annoying thing, which has cropped up a few times in this thread, is the lack of real objection from the Muslim community about what is going on. I’m a non practising Catholic, however I would be severly pissed off if people in another country were bombing people and using Catholicism as a justification, in fact i’d be outraged because I’d be implicated by their completely iditoic interpretation of a religion. I don’t get the same sense of outrage by the Muslim community.
Being a Brit, I also take offence to the protesters in London over these cartoons (fucking cartoons for gods sake and i don’t care about what some book says it is obviously ridiculous, or am I ignorant or stupid or both!), chanting about how the bombings in July could happen again and one protester dressing up as a suicide bomber (I should have been at Euston when the bombs went off but slept in, am thankful that i drink because i had a hangover!)
You know, a couple of days ago a thousand people died when a boat sunk near Egypt due to severe safety failings and a couple of weeks before that, 400 people on a pilgrimage to Mecca were stampeded to death due to poor crowd management and the most enthralling news item is about some bloody cartoons, has perspective been lost?
Is the printing of some cartoons the most important thing in the Muslim world? Surely there are more important things to be addressed, such as proper integration with other societies and religions, which has got to be the main thing holding muslims back? I say this because the Sikh community has prospered very well in the UK.
Rant over, life is far too fucking short to let religion get in the way, I don’t want to be converted and I’m not fussed about the colour of someones skin (one of the blogs referred to “brownies”).
I disagree with why the cartoons were published, they were right wing papers in Scandinvia that did the deed, but I would implore anyone in their right mind to ask whether this is the most important question facing the Muslim community and if you so yes, you are talking absolute shite.
Kashif,
No offense, but you call me a liar and ask me to back up what I said.
Finally people have in the recent responses begun throwing singualr lines of Quranic verses. Though I don’t in anyway positively affirm that what has been shown above as factual. However I would like to state on record that grabbing singular lines out of context, with no preceeding lines and post lines makes such references highly dubious.
Here’s you chance. Prove us wrong. Tell me how I am misreading these surahs. I provided the refference, so feel free to open you copy of the Koran and tell me what I am missing. Feel free to find nasty quotes in the Bible all you like, though keep in mind that to Christians the New Testament trumps the Old, so any contradiction between the two is won by the New in their view. Once you find the nasty verses, lets see if we can find any mainstream clerics quoting it as justification for violence or threats.
You threw down a gauntlet, and now you’re toddling off when it was picked up?
Personally, I took no offense (nor meant to give any) until the word liar was tossed out, and even that was a minor prick. It’s common in the blog world (and before that, Usenet) for someone short on facts or in the weak posistion to resort to name calling.