TG
I have looked for that one as well.
Can't find any source or documentation for Bush (senior or jr) having any business dealings with the BL family.
Please let me know if you have somewhere specific I could look.
Islamic scholar expresses frustration
Moderator: Available
jorvik: I worry too about people lashing out against Muslims for no reason whatsoever. I haven't heard anything in the press lately about that, though I imagine that life is horrible for kids at school whose peers know (or just idiotically guess) that they might be Muslim or from Iraq. Not long after the war began one of my friends said some really alarming things, statements of such rage I could hardly believe I was talking to the rational, intelligent engineer I'd known for over a decade. He's since calmed down, but yikes! I didn't even want to talk to him about it. He'd gone over the edge into behavior I normally associate with extremists.
A lack of readily available info, or the same info over and over again, is what the US bases its opinions on, and probably what drove my friend to his wild conclusions. Couple that with the fact that most citizens have no concept of what it's like to have your country invaded, or to have soldiers with machine guns in the streets, or to have police patrols of eight men with shotguns in a pickup truck as your main law enforcement, and you get a lot of oversimplified banter going around that hearkens of "Let's just get 'em!" or "Let's just pull out and go home!" Argh.
But I'm not bitter ...
Does everyone individually have to resort to research from as many primary sources as they can scrape together, or are we going to start to hear from some experts who've had 'dirt time' in the subject? It seems like people with the golden combination of intelligence, objectivity and direct experience are hard to come by when it comes to Iraq, 9/11 and the politics of war. Does anyone have good sources?
Kami
A lack of readily available info, or the same info over and over again, is what the US bases its opinions on, and probably what drove my friend to his wild conclusions. Couple that with the fact that most citizens have no concept of what it's like to have your country invaded, or to have soldiers with machine guns in the streets, or to have police patrols of eight men with shotguns in a pickup truck as your main law enforcement, and you get a lot of oversimplified banter going around that hearkens of "Let's just get 'em!" or "Let's just pull out and go home!" Argh.
But I'm not bitter ...
Does everyone individually have to resort to research from as many primary sources as they can scrape together, or are we going to start to hear from some experts who've had 'dirt time' in the subject? It seems like people with the golden combination of intelligence, objectivity and direct experience are hard to come by when it comes to Iraq, 9/11 and the politics of war. Does anyone have good sources?
Kami
One seed, many lives.
-
jorvik
)-
Rick Wilson
TG
I saw the same special.
There was a great number of interesting connections that came out. The connections were to the family not the terrorist.
Jorvik I think you should track down the CBC special it deals with 911 the conspiracy theories and was very well done.
As for Osama being an outcast, this is true, but the special had some interesting information on the Saudi Government and Osama.
I won’t posts the details because it was awhile ago that I saw it and I believe it would only derail this thread.
I saw the same special.
There was a great number of interesting connections that came out. The connections were to the family not the terrorist.
Jorvik I think you should track down the CBC special it deals with 911 the conspiracy theories and was very well done.
As for Osama being an outcast, this is true, but the special had some interesting information on the Saudi Government and Osama.
I won’t posts the details because it was awhile ago that I saw it and I believe it would only derail this thread.
-
Akil Todd Harvey
- Posts: 790
- Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
- Location: Tallahassee, FL
- Contact:
Sorry to be gone so long folks,
Not ignoring anyone, I just started new work this week in San Diego (two hour commute, each leg) and hope to continue to contribute here.
Kami, Some interesting posts (in a good way)......
To try to walk in the other person's shoes for a mile..........
Keep in mind that I am not trying to turn myself into the word police, although through discussion I think words can be chosen jointly that both convey the key meaning with the minimum amount of mischaracterization. If one does not participate in the dialogue, one may later feel that the word police have descended and made law on what these folks should be called since surely a name is useful and one that is minimally offensive would be the best choice (probably no such thing exists as a perfect choice, there will always be someone who is offended, the question is how to offend the fewest (it would seem).
It seems to me that most religions have high ideals for human conduct that are codified into the religious texts. The ten commandments are pretty straight forward, for example. It would be kind of hard to claim to the world that someone is a Good Christian when they are doing something clearly against any of the Commandments (the inquisition for example). While there may have been many supportive Christians at the time of the inquisition, there were probably many Christians that were against the inquisition and many more who have spoken up or written about how bad and un-Christian those times and actions were.
Now, when Osama bin Dingbat allegedly hires a few assassins for despicable acts that the Quran and the Sunnah (records of Mohammad's actions worthy of aspiring to, kind of like when Christians ask, what would Jesus do?) of our beloved Prophet clearly denounce as being forbidden, then although some Muslims may support these acts at the given time, these acts in clearly and obviously not in the line with the true teachings of Islam, which is why I have no problem disassociating Islam form the actions of these terrorists, even if they did claim that their actions were in the name of Islam.
To Me, Christianity teaches people to love each other and respect each other. When Christians do despicable acts that are clearly contrary to their religion, I dont blame the religion or those of that faith who are innocent, I blame those guilty for the acts.........
Does anyone suppose that the near constant media barrage of anti-Islam rhetoric, post 9/11, had anything to do with this guys rage? Deliberate or accidental (from ignorance) misrepresentation can easily lead folks to think that more Muslims support radical Islam than actually do. I mean, they dont speak out on tv against this stuff, right? Of course, getting some people to hear a moderate Muslim voice can be very hard to do, as they are far less exciting to put on the news than the wacked out rhetoric of the radicals. If it bleeds it leads is the mantra of today’s news and moderate Muslims decrying terrorism is something you will almost never hear on tv, IMHO, cuz it is not inflammatory. It wont increase the ratings and thus it wont make the air..........
Would be interested in your opinions, gut feelings, etc.
Akil
Not ignoring anyone, I just started new work this week in San Diego (two hour commute, each leg) and hope to continue to contribute here.
Kami, Some interesting posts (in a good way)......
I value your point of view as well. I think an underlying implication here is that while I may or may not agree with your statements (or you with mine), we encourage ourselves to suspend judgement for a moment and try to place ourselves in the shoes of the other. Congrats, dialogue accomplished in this caseI'm very interested in your point of view, rather than looking for ammo in your posts to shoot back at you.
To try to walk in the other person's shoes for a mile..........
I think the answer might lie exactly in what we call a Christian terrorist or a jewish terrorist. Simply calling them a terrorist seems rather sufficient. As I have said in the past, I have never heard or read about Christian terrorists either in the present time or in the past (history), although we all know they exist (as a minority of the faith, not a majority by any means).what am I supposed to call terrorists who claim that their cause is fueled by Islam vs. Christianity "
Keep in mind that I am not trying to turn myself into the word police, although through discussion I think words can be chosen jointly that both convey the key meaning with the minimum amount of mischaracterization. If one does not participate in the dialogue, one may later feel that the word police have descended and made law on what these folks should be called since surely a name is useful and one that is minimally offensive would be the best choice (probably no such thing exists as a perfect choice, there will always be someone who is offended, the question is how to offend the fewest (it would seem).
And if Hitler wanted to be viewed as a faithful Christian just trying to purify his people, would we be willing to oblige him, despite the fact that it clearly would be offensive to some, if not most Christians?They want to be viewed as faithful Muslims.
It seems to me that most religions have high ideals for human conduct that are codified into the religious texts. The ten commandments are pretty straight forward, for example. It would be kind of hard to claim to the world that someone is a Good Christian when they are doing something clearly against any of the Commandments (the inquisition for example). While there may have been many supportive Christians at the time of the inquisition, there were probably many Christians that were against the inquisition and many more who have spoken up or written about how bad and un-Christian those times and actions were.
Now, when Osama bin Dingbat allegedly hires a few assassins for despicable acts that the Quran and the Sunnah (records of Mohammad's actions worthy of aspiring to, kind of like when Christians ask, what would Jesus do?) of our beloved Prophet clearly denounce as being forbidden, then although some Muslims may support these acts at the given time, these acts in clearly and obviously not in the line with the true teachings of Islam, which is why I have no problem disassociating Islam form the actions of these terrorists, even if they did claim that their actions were in the name of Islam.
To Me, Christianity teaches people to love each other and respect each other. When Christians do despicable acts that are clearly contrary to their religion, I dont blame the religion or those of that faith who are innocent, I blame those guilty for the acts.........
Try putting on a veil for half a day and see how they stare at you.BTW, I don't see a lot of anti-Islamic sentiment around where I'm at. Maybe I'm just hanging out with the wrong crowd.
Where his rage came from is what concerns me. Although your first statement was that you had not seen a lot of Anti-Islamic sentiment, with the kind of sentiment that you refer to, I dont need a lot of it to be alarmed. It only takes a single person to burn down a Mosque or an Islamic school.Not long after the war began one of my friends said some really alarming things, statements of such rage I could hardly believe I was talking to the rational, intelligent engineer I'd known for over a decade. He's since calmed down, but yikes! I didn't even want to talk to him about it. He'd gone over the edge into behavior I normally associate with extremists.
Does anyone suppose that the near constant media barrage of anti-Islam rhetoric, post 9/11, had anything to do with this guys rage? Deliberate or accidental (from ignorance) misrepresentation can easily lead folks to think that more Muslims support radical Islam than actually do. I mean, they dont speak out on tv against this stuff, right? Of course, getting some people to hear a moderate Muslim voice can be very hard to do, as they are far less exciting to put on the news than the wacked out rhetoric of the radicals. If it bleeds it leads is the mantra of today’s news and moderate Muslims decrying terrorism is something you will almost never hear on tv, IMHO, cuz it is not inflammatory. It wont increase the ratings and thus it wont make the air..........
What would you call the guy who killed the Israeli prime minister not so many years ago?I get frustrated when it seems like a person's favored group is supposed to get special treatment and have no labels attached, but others are fair game, or worse, having no labels at all for anyone which leads to 'this person of no labels or nation did this bad thing to this other person of no labels or nation'. It makes it very difficult to have a conversation. Would you be willing to accept the label of radical Islamics? If not, what label would you accept?
Would be interested in your opinions, gut feelings, etc.
Akil
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave
I hope you like your new job. I can see the long commute cutting into leisure activities big time!
The first thing, although I'm not approaching this in order, is to say that my friend who went off the deep end wasn't anti-Islam at all. He was more against the nations that he felt were responsible, and I don't remember exactly but I think he blamed Iraq and Afghanistan, wanted them nuked. Child of Cold War, like me, but unlike me he forgot for awhile that that level of indiscriminate killing is more evil than the acts that inspired it. Being a realist, I know that civilian casualties and suffering of the innocent is an inevitability of war, of many kinds of conflict in fact. But the kind of retaliation he was talking about was, IMHO, outrageous, extremist and not very well thought out.
Point taken re: Christian terrorist or Jewish terrorist. I agree with that. I wasn't so much thinking of calling someone a Muslim terrorist as I was thinking of calling them Islamic extremist, but maybe it's all just the same error of thinking. I do think that terrorist may be too general for many discussions. But perhaps just calling them by their organizational names is the most specific and least dehumanizing. I don't think that the members of the IRA would object to anyone calling them that, nor would their opponents, nor would their sympathizers.
Point very much taken re: Hitler being Christian. (Shudder) But that wasn't his platform and origin of his cause, whereas with the terrorists in question, Islam *seems to* (maybe I shouldn't buy into what might be just propaganda to them) be their inspiration. Nazi Germany was a political force and their platform was a political one. Hitler didn't do what he did to improve the lot of Christians and Christianity, but to improve the lot of Germans. I'd rather not dehumanize anyone, good or bad. It's probably not practical, maybe even badly unrealistic, but I think it's wise to look in my enemy's eyes and know his cause, otherwise it seems to be too disrespectful of life and the human condition in general. I would find such a confrontation terrifying, but I think I owe it to the human part of me to acknowledge they're human too, even if they do despicable things. This is probably going to sound really obscure, but I eat meat. I prefer to eat meat that I know has come from an animal that has been treated with the respect due a living thing, even though it seems contradictory that by my actions I destroy that life. I would like to treat my enemies with the same respect due any living thing, and dispatch them as cleanly as I can when I defend what I hold dear, and not dismiss their existence as something less than what they are, human. Conflict happens. How I address that conflict is how I express my sense of honor and how I express my hopes for a future with fewer wars and fewer rapists and fewer (fill in the blank with your own horrors.)
I have wondered recently how people would react if I started going to belly dance classes again. It's Americanized and doesn't have much to do with the Middle East anymore, although the instructors acknowledge it's Middle Eastern roots with respect and pride and dance to traditional ME music. But maybe people have taken exception to this. I don't know. I do know that Portland, the focus of civic life in this area (even though I live in a different state, it's just a half hour away), is very liberal and the local media and the most vocal of its citizens are very concerned about Muslims being safe. It is likely different elsewhere, but the local party line is to take out your rage on the specific persons responsible, not against all Muslims or the one that happens to live down the street.
Just for the record, wearing a veil often gets stares because it's uncommon. People who wear saris get stares too. I try not to stare, but I definately double take when I see a sari, because they're so very beautiful!
I also stare when I see a nun in a habit. They're rare. Some of those stares will be hostile regardless of the group, and Muslims are in the spotlight right now so they'll be garnering more stares than ever, and more hostile stares than ever. I'm not going to get a good feel for what's going on in the street, regardless. I don't get downtown a lot, and even if I did, like I said, a lot of people locally are looking out for their Muslim friends and neighbors.
I am concerned about anti-Islamic rhetoric, but I am also very concerned about anti-American rhetoric, especially in the Middle East right now. It's been going on a lot longer than since Kuwait. I think some of our policies are misguided. Similar policies are hurting us domestically, though you'll get no agreement as to which policies are hurting who and how.
It's all just a huge mess. I hope we learn from our mistakes, and our successes, but it's almost impossible without agreement as to what is a mistake and what is a success. It's unreasonable to look to others to decide what those mistakes are, however (although advice and guidance are always welcome). We have to discover that for ourselves, just as an individual does. An additional complication: those with malice and greed in their hearts can be just as convincing and eloquent as those with good intentions, and people are more apt to believe the guy next door than the guy overseas. So what do we do? Hope that whatever the political fallout, that there's as little killing as possible on both sides while the guys in charge figure it out. In the meantime, with the world's attention on Islam, I hope that the core beliefs and true face of Islam shine through. Not all of what we see may be beautiful, but as you said neither is all that is practiced in Christianity is beautiful either. Historically and presently, some of the practices of Christianity leave me cold. Not all of those practices are suggested in the holy writings, but are traditions or practices that have developed a life of their own. Some ugly practices *are* within doctrine, and thankfully most Christians take a moderate view and don't feel compelled to burn witches, among other things. There is also a great deal of diversity in Christianity, and as I understand it a great deal of diversity in Islam, even more than is suggested by the most commonly mentioned sects. My own religion (I'm not Christian) is also very diverse. I would not want to be associated with probably a half or more of the religious group people would tend to box me in with. In fact I don't like a lot of them, and tend to avoid them when we meet in public places. What they practice has nothing to do with me.
I heartily agree that the media selects, shall we say, less than ideal spokespeople for the news. A non-religious example that illustrates the point vividly is that there was a group trying to limit the amount of light that spills up into the sky at night. They wanted to try to focus street lamps downward to prevent 'light pollution' and quoted studies that suggest there's a lot of sleep disruption and perhaps even myopia caused by excessive light at night. Some of their strategies, I think, might have proved to be more energy efficient as well. Did they get someone who sounded sane to speak for this group once the newscaster outlined this information? No. The sound bite they got was from a pale, lanky man who hadn't brushed his hair in a week. With a wild look in his eyes he said, "We need the dark. We need to recapture the night!"
It must be great for the news business if they protect Muslims from violence on the one hand and stir the mobs into a fury with the other hand. Gee, I guess my bias against the media is starting to show. Oh well.
I do hope this situation, poised on the brink of disaster as it is, encourages people to take a good, long, careful look at Islam, and not through the media's filter. More understanding is needed of this faith. I think so much of what is going on is based on ignorance, and that goes for all sides of the issue. It's really hard to learn anything when you're mad and scared, but I think that's what we're going to have to do. Maybe the learning process will reduce the fear and anger enough that the dialogue can spread beyond relatively gentle forums like these into the general populace. This comes, of course, from the child of the people who freed themselves with the Velvet Revolution. And no, that's not a pop rock group.
I tend to be naive and idealistic, but sometimes it works.
Kami
The first thing, although I'm not approaching this in order, is to say that my friend who went off the deep end wasn't anti-Islam at all. He was more against the nations that he felt were responsible, and I don't remember exactly but I think he blamed Iraq and Afghanistan, wanted them nuked. Child of Cold War, like me, but unlike me he forgot for awhile that that level of indiscriminate killing is more evil than the acts that inspired it. Being a realist, I know that civilian casualties and suffering of the innocent is an inevitability of war, of many kinds of conflict in fact. But the kind of retaliation he was talking about was, IMHO, outrageous, extremist and not very well thought out.
Point taken re: Christian terrorist or Jewish terrorist. I agree with that. I wasn't so much thinking of calling someone a Muslim terrorist as I was thinking of calling them Islamic extremist, but maybe it's all just the same error of thinking. I do think that terrorist may be too general for many discussions. But perhaps just calling them by their organizational names is the most specific and least dehumanizing. I don't think that the members of the IRA would object to anyone calling them that, nor would their opponents, nor would their sympathizers.
Point very much taken re: Hitler being Christian. (Shudder) But that wasn't his platform and origin of his cause, whereas with the terrorists in question, Islam *seems to* (maybe I shouldn't buy into what might be just propaganda to them) be their inspiration. Nazi Germany was a political force and their platform was a political one. Hitler didn't do what he did to improve the lot of Christians and Christianity, but to improve the lot of Germans. I'd rather not dehumanize anyone, good or bad. It's probably not practical, maybe even badly unrealistic, but I think it's wise to look in my enemy's eyes and know his cause, otherwise it seems to be too disrespectful of life and the human condition in general. I would find such a confrontation terrifying, but I think I owe it to the human part of me to acknowledge they're human too, even if they do despicable things. This is probably going to sound really obscure, but I eat meat. I prefer to eat meat that I know has come from an animal that has been treated with the respect due a living thing, even though it seems contradictory that by my actions I destroy that life. I would like to treat my enemies with the same respect due any living thing, and dispatch them as cleanly as I can when I defend what I hold dear, and not dismiss their existence as something less than what they are, human. Conflict happens. How I address that conflict is how I express my sense of honor and how I express my hopes for a future with fewer wars and fewer rapists and fewer (fill in the blank with your own horrors.)
I have wondered recently how people would react if I started going to belly dance classes again. It's Americanized and doesn't have much to do with the Middle East anymore, although the instructors acknowledge it's Middle Eastern roots with respect and pride and dance to traditional ME music. But maybe people have taken exception to this. I don't know. I do know that Portland, the focus of civic life in this area (even though I live in a different state, it's just a half hour away), is very liberal and the local media and the most vocal of its citizens are very concerned about Muslims being safe. It is likely different elsewhere, but the local party line is to take out your rage on the specific persons responsible, not against all Muslims or the one that happens to live down the street.
Just for the record, wearing a veil often gets stares because it's uncommon. People who wear saris get stares too. I try not to stare, but I definately double take when I see a sari, because they're so very beautiful!
I also stare when I see a nun in a habit. They're rare. Some of those stares will be hostile regardless of the group, and Muslims are in the spotlight right now so they'll be garnering more stares than ever, and more hostile stares than ever. I'm not going to get a good feel for what's going on in the street, regardless. I don't get downtown a lot, and even if I did, like I said, a lot of people locally are looking out for their Muslim friends and neighbors. I am concerned about anti-Islamic rhetoric, but I am also very concerned about anti-American rhetoric, especially in the Middle East right now. It's been going on a lot longer than since Kuwait. I think some of our policies are misguided. Similar policies are hurting us domestically, though you'll get no agreement as to which policies are hurting who and how.
It's all just a huge mess. I hope we learn from our mistakes, and our successes, but it's almost impossible without agreement as to what is a mistake and what is a success. It's unreasonable to look to others to decide what those mistakes are, however (although advice and guidance are always welcome). We have to discover that for ourselves, just as an individual does. An additional complication: those with malice and greed in their hearts can be just as convincing and eloquent as those with good intentions, and people are more apt to believe the guy next door than the guy overseas. So what do we do? Hope that whatever the political fallout, that there's as little killing as possible on both sides while the guys in charge figure it out. In the meantime, with the world's attention on Islam, I hope that the core beliefs and true face of Islam shine through. Not all of what we see may be beautiful, but as you said neither is all that is practiced in Christianity is beautiful either. Historically and presently, some of the practices of Christianity leave me cold. Not all of those practices are suggested in the holy writings, but are traditions or practices that have developed a life of their own. Some ugly practices *are* within doctrine, and thankfully most Christians take a moderate view and don't feel compelled to burn witches, among other things. There is also a great deal of diversity in Christianity, and as I understand it a great deal of diversity in Islam, even more than is suggested by the most commonly mentioned sects. My own religion (I'm not Christian) is also very diverse. I would not want to be associated with probably a half or more of the religious group people would tend to box me in with. In fact I don't like a lot of them, and tend to avoid them when we meet in public places. What they practice has nothing to do with me.I heartily agree that the media selects, shall we say, less than ideal spokespeople for the news. A non-religious example that illustrates the point vividly is that there was a group trying to limit the amount of light that spills up into the sky at night. They wanted to try to focus street lamps downward to prevent 'light pollution' and quoted studies that suggest there's a lot of sleep disruption and perhaps even myopia caused by excessive light at night. Some of their strategies, I think, might have proved to be more energy efficient as well. Did they get someone who sounded sane to speak for this group once the newscaster outlined this information? No. The sound bite they got was from a pale, lanky man who hadn't brushed his hair in a week. With a wild look in his eyes he said, "We need the dark. We need to recapture the night!"
It must be great for the news business if they protect Muslims from violence on the one hand and stir the mobs into a fury with the other hand. Gee, I guess my bias against the media is starting to show. Oh well.
I do hope this situation, poised on the brink of disaster as it is, encourages people to take a good, long, careful look at Islam, and not through the media's filter. More understanding is needed of this faith. I think so much of what is going on is based on ignorance, and that goes for all sides of the issue. It's really hard to learn anything when you're mad and scared, but I think that's what we're going to have to do. Maybe the learning process will reduce the fear and anger enough that the dialogue can spread beyond relatively gentle forums like these into the general populace. This comes, of course, from the child of the people who freed themselves with the Velvet Revolution. And no, that's not a pop rock group.
I tend to be naive and idealistic, but sometimes it works.Kami
One seed, many lives.
-
Akil Todd Harvey
- Posts: 790
- Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:01 am
- Location: Tallahassee, FL
- Contact:
As for my daily commute, at least three of us share the burden.........And it aint so bad since those who are commuting to simi valley have a 6 hour daily commute........At this point, I am just trying to gain more experience so that I can eventually get work that is closer to home.
Similarly, I have taken similar, if not identical stands on the other side of the issue (talking to Muslims about the West), informing them that not all in the west are our enemies.
Some people have had the tendency to assume immediately that if I dont tell them that I have spoken out against the ills of our percieved enemy, that I have done nothing to speak out against terrorism amongst the Muslims. And yet, if I had been asked, I could tell them how I participate in Fora within a Muslim website for Malay people living overseas, trying to dispel myths about the West/Christianity, etc.
There are lots of moderate Muslims taking a stand against terrorism, on the individual level, on the political level, at the religious institutions, and in ways that folks including myself are wholly unaware of, but they will rarely, if ever, make the news.......There is a tendency among even moderate people to belive that something has not occurred just because it did not make it on CNN or fox news or aljazeera, etc..........Now is the time to insist that journalists become journalists again and not a bunch of slick gossipy nitwits that cannot introduce complicated subject matter in anything short of a simplistic, black and white (yeah, you need to worry) frame of reference.
If a Muslim religious leader spoke favorably of terroism in a mosque in the US, it would make the news, the talk shows, and of course talk radio. If, as has occurred by my own observation on many occasions, Muslim religious leaders denounce terrorism within Mosques located within the US (there are literally thousands of them in the US), it will sound like a tree falling in the forest........If there is no journalist or camerperson there, does it make a sound?
Akil
I wonder what is wrong with our education system when in the day and age of near universal education, people are about as ignorant as ever. That seems to apply overseas just as much as here.[/b]
Ignorance is bliss, right? Not in these circumstances. I find I have to agree with you in this regard. And it is for this reason that I have spent so much time posting on these fora (forums) even when I have been a little less than wlecome at times.I think so much of what is going on is based on ignorance, and that goes for all sides of the issue.
Similarly, I have taken similar, if not identical stands on the other side of the issue (talking to Muslims about the West), informing them that not all in the west are our enemies.
Some people have had the tendency to assume immediately that if I dont tell them that I have spoken out against the ills of our percieved enemy, that I have done nothing to speak out against terrorism amongst the Muslims. And yet, if I had been asked, I could tell them how I participate in Fora within a Muslim website for Malay people living overseas, trying to dispel myths about the West/Christianity, etc.
There are lots of moderate Muslims taking a stand against terrorism, on the individual level, on the political level, at the religious institutions, and in ways that folks including myself are wholly unaware of, but they will rarely, if ever, make the news.......There is a tendency among even moderate people to belive that something has not occurred just because it did not make it on CNN or fox news or aljazeera, etc..........Now is the time to insist that journalists become journalists again and not a bunch of slick gossipy nitwits that cannot introduce complicated subject matter in anything short of a simplistic, black and white (yeah, you need to worry) frame of reference.
If a Muslim religious leader spoke favorably of terroism in a mosque in the US, it would make the news, the talk shows, and of course talk radio. If, as has occurred by my own observation on many occasions, Muslim religious leaders denounce terrorism within Mosques located within the US (there are literally thousands of them in the US), it will sound like a tree falling in the forest........If there is no journalist or camerperson there, does it make a sound?
Akil
I wonder what is wrong with our education system when in the day and age of near universal education, people are about as ignorant as ever. That seems to apply overseas just as much as here.[/b]
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave
First, an admission... haven't read the whole thread. Forgiveness please, if I am dupklicating content. Anyway, ATH, I think we both and probably everyone posting can understand that islam cannot be equated with violent tendencies or the other negative attributes its been associated with.
I'd be interested to hear your summary view on something tho.... something that's been discussed before but I want to size up as concisely as I could: regarding the islamists who DO view the the world through a perspective that is violent, subjugating to women, anti-christian, anti-west, anti-speech and religious freedom and basically totalitarian... do you think their religious fervor is completely coincidental? Like, if a criminal is swedish, no one makes an association between the two, but they do with islamic people who misbehave in our eyes because of media focus and prejudice? OR is there something about islam, for at least some people, or at least some branches of it, that is conducive to violent and totalitarian worldviews? If there is, what's going on there? If there isn't, is there some aspect of religious fervor in general that is driving it (that is, yes, the fervent islamists are violent but so are the fervent Christians and Jews?) If there isn't, what social factors drive cultures in Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, etc that appear to American eyes to be volatile, sexist, and suppress individual freedoms?
I promise I'm not trying to make a statement with the above, I really am asking how these issues appear to someone with feet in both cultures. I'd be happy to explain my feelings on the roots of various stereotypes of at least three demographic groups I'm lumped into.
I'd be interested to hear your summary view on something tho.... something that's been discussed before but I want to size up as concisely as I could: regarding the islamists who DO view the the world through a perspective that is violent, subjugating to women, anti-christian, anti-west, anti-speech and religious freedom and basically totalitarian... do you think their religious fervor is completely coincidental? Like, if a criminal is swedish, no one makes an association between the two, but they do with islamic people who misbehave in our eyes because of media focus and prejudice? OR is there something about islam, for at least some people, or at least some branches of it, that is conducive to violent and totalitarian worldviews? If there is, what's going on there? If there isn't, is there some aspect of religious fervor in general that is driving it (that is, yes, the fervent islamists are violent but so are the fervent Christians and Jews?) If there isn't, what social factors drive cultures in Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, etc that appear to American eyes to be volatile, sexist, and suppress individual freedoms?
I promise I'm not trying to make a statement with the above, I really am asking how these issues appear to someone with feet in both cultures. I'd be happy to explain my feelings on the roots of various stereotypes of at least three demographic groups I'm lumped into.
--Ian
Akil
I am seriously not trying to hack you off.
But you need to be alot more accurate in what you post.
You stated:
"If Hitler wanted to be viewed as a Christian just trying to purifiy his people."
A-Hitler was not a Christian. History show that he was activily trying to dismantle the Christain churchs and Christian worship in Germany.
B- A large number of his early political foes were staunch Christians of several denominations.
C-A number of them ended up executed or imprisoned.
D-History shows Hilter was activily attempting to create and spread a pagan based "state relgion" based upon partially invented so-called "nordic" history.
E-He most certianly did not view himself as a Christian.
Your making point based upon inaccurte information.
I am seriously not trying to hack you off.
But you need to be alot more accurate in what you post.
You stated:
"If Hitler wanted to be viewed as a Christian just trying to purifiy his people."
A-Hitler was not a Christian. History show that he was activily trying to dismantle the Christain churchs and Christian worship in Germany.
B- A large number of his early political foes were staunch Christians of several denominations.
C-A number of them ended up executed or imprisoned.
D-History shows Hilter was activily attempting to create and spread a pagan based "state relgion" based upon partially invented so-called "nordic" history.
E-He most certianly did not view himself as a Christian.
Your making point based upon inaccurte information.
Thanks for the clarification cxt, I didn't realize Hitler wasn't Christian. I understand he was a vegetarian, but now that I look back over the post more carefully I think that Akil was postulating that *if* he was acting as a Christian ... which means I answered the wrong question too. Do we forgive someone because s/he acted within their morale guidelines to the best of their knowledge? Pretty clearly the answer is no when it comes to irrevocable destruction and inflicting harm on others. The rest of the time, it's one of those things that has to be taken on a case by case basis.
It's an unfortunate truth that the various texts grant room to justify evil acts. The Ten Commandments are not followed completely and literally. The Crusades clearly violate the Ten Commandments -- They do not say, Thou shalt not kill your fellow Christians and other people we like. I only read one analysis so I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that jihad was meant to be introspective, the cleansing of the mind and soul, not the world. But jihad has been the rallying cry for many a conflict.
This is one of those situations where the 'spirit of the law' seems pretty obvious, but it isn't followed by certain people because they feel they have been backed into a corner and must act violently. They can find justification enough if they look for it in the sacred texts, whatever those texts may be.
Kami
It's an unfortunate truth that the various texts grant room to justify evil acts. The Ten Commandments are not followed completely and literally. The Crusades clearly violate the Ten Commandments -- They do not say, Thou shalt not kill your fellow Christians and other people we like. I only read one analysis so I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that jihad was meant to be introspective, the cleansing of the mind and soul, not the world. But jihad has been the rallying cry for many a conflict.
This is one of those situations where the 'spirit of the law' seems pretty obvious, but it isn't followed by certain people because they feel they have been backed into a corner and must act violently. They can find justification enough if they look for it in the sacred texts, whatever those texts may be.
Kami
One seed, many lives.
KZ Miller
Thats what makes this stuff so tough to talk about.
The word "jihad" can be translated as "struggle."
I'm quite sure that is a perfectly valid way to look at it or define it or approach it.
Equally sure that a number of radicials have used it to justify armed conflict.
In much the same way Christians used to slaughter "heretics" 400 years ago.
The problem is not with the religion (Christian, Muslium, Buddist, pick one or feel free to list your own)
the problem are the radicals that want to use relgion as a shield or to justify acts of hate and violence.
What also makes it tough is that most Western nations are currently secular--we may have a Chrisitan foundation for our nations.
But most Western nations cut a pretty clear line between Church and State.
In part it is due to a backlash from when The Church in its various incarnations acted as a de-facto government for many nations.
In many Eastern nations the line between Church and State is not nearly as clear cut.
A very different way to do things from our perspective and that can cause problems both ways.
Thats what makes this stuff so tough to talk about.
The word "jihad" can be translated as "struggle."
I'm quite sure that is a perfectly valid way to look at it or define it or approach it.
Equally sure that a number of radicials have used it to justify armed conflict.
In much the same way Christians used to slaughter "heretics" 400 years ago.
The problem is not with the religion (Christian, Muslium, Buddist, pick one or feel free to list your own)
the problem are the radicals that want to use relgion as a shield or to justify acts of hate and violence.
What also makes it tough is that most Western nations are currently secular--we may have a Chrisitan foundation for our nations.
But most Western nations cut a pretty clear line between Church and State.
In part it is due to a backlash from when The Church in its various incarnations acted as a de-facto government for many nations.
In many Eastern nations the line between Church and State is not nearly as clear cut.
A very different way to do things from our perspective and that can cause problems both ways.
-
jorvik
Kami
quote
"Thanks for the clarification cxt, I didn't realize Hitler wasn't Christian. I understand he was a vegetarian,"
This is often said and untrue..he was in fact a very heavy meat eater, who fasted occaisionally on vegetarian foods on the orders of his Doctors. As a vegetarian myself I take no offence at this statement, but it does prove a point...that a lie often repeated becomes a form of truth.
I think that we should listen to the answers that Akil gives to Ian's question....( which I think was sensible..although could be taken as inflammatory).
We have a golden opportunity here to listen to a practising Muslim talk about Islam, we can learn a lot..we can learn to know our enemies and to seperate them from our friends ( Islamic or otherwise)
quote
"Thanks for the clarification cxt, I didn't realize Hitler wasn't Christian. I understand he was a vegetarian,"
This is often said and untrue..he was in fact a very heavy meat eater, who fasted occaisionally on vegetarian foods on the orders of his Doctors. As a vegetarian myself I take no offence at this statement, but it does prove a point...that a lie often repeated becomes a form of truth.
I think that we should listen to the answers that Akil gives to Ian's question....( which I think was sensible..although could be taken as inflammatory).
We have a golden opportunity here to listen to a practising Muslim talk about Islam, we can learn a lot..we can learn to know our enemies and to seperate them from our friends ( Islamic or otherwise)
