Islamic extremism and the theory of a Clash of Civilizations

[Konovalov]

I am curious as to where people stand regarding the thesis written by Samuel P. Huntington, author of “The Clash of Civilizations?” I ask this in light of the current debate regarding Islam which every few months seems be debated on this forum. If you could respond to the poll and give your reasons for or against this theory then it would be most appreciated.

[August]

I voted "not sure". So many paths are not taken when only one path can be chosen.

[Type941]

I believe that there is already a clash of civilizations, otherwise there wouldn't have been a discussion on it. However I have to read the abstract you;re referring to to make up my mind on what he's saying.

[The Avon Lady]

The dream of the Caliphate has been revived. It is believed to be within grasp.

The world's opening up the doors of immigration to Muslims for the past 30 years is the Trojan horse. Shar'ia is just a decade or two of democratic elections away in some European countries.

Yet, this cannot be called civilization (http://bareknucklepolitics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=126#126), by any stretch of the meaning of the word. :x

[FesterShinetop]

Yet, this cannot be called civilization (http://bareknucklepolitics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=126#126), by any stretch of the meaning of the word. :x

That is just sickening... :nope: I just can not believe how someone could do something like that!

[Skybird]

Yes.

I'm currently working on an according XXXL-sized text since some time, so my reasons will be available for download in one or two weeks. Think I will not raise your sympathy with it, Konovalov, but I hope we could remain friends then :lol:

[Iceman]

What a sad Pic Avon Lady....God was and is watching that stuff...Time....Time is almost up. 8 yrs old...an 8 yr old barely has a concept of the law....and according to Christian scripture where no knowledge of the law is there is no transgression...so that guy did that to an innocent creature.

Angels in Heaven are being made ready for battle.

Harvest time.

[Konovalov]

Yes.

I'm currently working on an according XXXL-sized text since some time, so my reasons will be available for download in one or two weeks. Think I will not raise your sympathy with it, Konovalov, but I hope we could remain friends then :lol:

I look forward to reading it. I'm sure we will continue to be so.

Yet, this cannot be called civilization (http://bareknucklepolitics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=126#126), by any stretch of the meaning of the word. :x

That is a disgrace. I would also add is this civilization? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/africa/04/photo_journal/rwanda/html/7.stm and was the worlds response to this genocide that as from civilized nations with the woefully inadequate response?

And are these the acts of civilized societies? http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/thisiswar/

I take it that you voted yes to the poll question? :)

[The Avon Lady]

Yet, this cannot be called civilization (http://bareknucklepolitics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=126#126), by any stretch of the meaning of the word. :x

That is a disgrace. I would also add is this civilization? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/africa/04/photo_journal/rwanda/html/7.stm and was the worlds response to this genocide that as from civilized nations with the woefully inadequate response?

And are these the acts of civilized societies? http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/thisiswar/
Surah 5, verse 38:

As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power.

You don't get it, do you? Are your links the results of religious or philosophical or institutionalized convictions? Do national and religious leaders advocate intentionally inflicting such acts on others?

You just don't get it.
I take it that you voted yes to the poll question?
Yes.

[Psycluded]

Yanno, I've never actually read the qu'ran. Gonna pick up a copy and read that thing, maybe then I'll actually be able to contribute something meaningful to a discussion about Islam...

[Konovalov]

Surah 5, verse 38:

As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power.

You don't get it, do you? Are your links the results of religious or philosophical or institutionalized convictions? Do national and religious leaders advocate intentionally inflicting such acts on others?

You just don't get it.
I take it that you voted yes to the poll question?
Yes.

The reference to male or female in the Holy Qu'ran for the Surah and Ayah that you quoted tie in with the Sharia and this is applicable if that person is a healthy adault, i.e. NOT a minor or a mentally disturbed person. This rule applies to hadd or hudud, tazir, and qisas crimes which are basically the groupings for the seriousness of the crime.

And further with regards to Ayah 38 of Surah 5 where this part of the Qu'ran touches on jurisprudence. The Canon Law jurists are not unanimous as to the value of the property stolen, but the vast majority hold that petty thefts are exempt from punishment such as the cutting off of a hand.

Perhaps you don't get it AL. May be you should stick to the Torah and Halacha.

[Konovalov]

Yanno, I've never actually read the qu'ran. Gonna pick up a copy and read that thing, maybe then I'll actually be able to contribute something meaningful to a discussion about Islam...

An excellent English translation is by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. At minimum make sure that you get a copy that has commentary and footnotes. In that way it will make it easier for you to formulate your own opinion and come to your own conclusions.

[Psycluded]

It's about the only holy book other than Hindi sutras that I haven't read... Bible, Torah (through my Hebrew-fluent Dad), Tao Te Ching, many different writings by Shintoists and Buddhists in Japan (been studying martial arts since I was able to read "Charlotte's Web"), and numberous studies on the cultural differences and similarities of orthodox christianity, catholicism and protestantism. About time I picked this one up, as it seems more appropriate due to the world political scene at this time.

Without making any judgements on Islamic culture or what-not, I will say that from all I've read, the jihdists seem to be hell-bent on prosecuding a complete culture war on all things christian/jewish/western. To borrow from Orson Scott Card, our inability to communicate effectively (which implies truthfulness) would argue for declaring the jihadists "Varelse". I have yet to see an instance where negotiations with a terrorist party led to anything other than compromise of the victim position, and the terrorists breaking faith entirely.

[Kissaki]

You don't get it, do you? Are your links the results of religious or philosophical or institutionalized convictions? Do national and religious leaders advocate intentionally inflicting such acts on others?

You just don't get it.


Can your own motives for posting your link withstand the same scrutiny?

Forgive me for saying so, but you haven't exactly analyzed Islam from more than one angle. What is pictured in your link is indeed an atrocity, but it's not Islam. If it was, you'd see it in every Muslim country. But you don't. What you see in that picture is one aspect of that particular nation's culture. Sure, religion and culture affect eachother, but that only goes to show that the danger lies in the interpretation - and both the Bible and the Torah could potentially be interpreted in a similar fashion. What about what Jesus said - if your right hand offends you, cut it off? A brutal culture might be inclined to interpret that quite literally.

PS: I'm curious as to where the Koran advocates crushing arms under the weight of trucks? This goes to illustrate my point that culture forms religion more often than the other way around.

[mog]

Voted no. Even if Muslim immigrants are the "indigestible minority" that Huntington claims they are, there will be a backlash from the natives long before Muslims become a significant political force. As the indigestible minority grows bigger, resentment against them grows in parallel, leading to an increase in support for fringe anti-immigration parties. The policies of the major parties then evolve toward tougher immigration laws in order to recapture these lost voters.

[snowsub]

I voted no.

More scaremongering "End of the world" Stuff, be it Global warming, asteroids, terrorists, bird flu, normal flu, aids etc etc etc

Don't blow the size of the minority out of proportion

My 2c

[August]

What is pictured in your link is indeed an atrocity, but it's not Islam. If it was, you'd see it in every Muslim country. But you don't.

I'd be interested in a list of such Muslim countries. I'll bet you can't name more than a couple and then they are certainly going to be arguable cases.

[Iceman]

What about what Jesus said - if your right hand offends you, cut it off? A brutal culture might be inclined to interpret that quite literally.


Finish the passage.Let me help you.


Mark 9

[43] And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
[44] Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
[45] And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
[46] Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
[47] And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
[48] Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
[49] For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt.
[50] Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his saltness, wherewith will ye season it? Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another

I do interpert that litterally...What a wise thing to do....Save your soul and sacrifice a limb...sure np....

It does NOT say...cut off thy brothers,neighbors, or anyone elses hand. Get it straight dude...

You will not find anywhere in the "New Testament" that says anything about doing any ill will to a fly even.

It ain't in there dude.

SALT...Peace...Peace with ones self....and others...what a novel idea huh?

[Kapitan]

america cant expect arab people to just drop thier way of life after thousands of years and adopt "american democracy" that goes against everything america stands for,

freedom of speech
the initial right to do what you like when you like how you like

ok there are some real bad regiemes but the arab world is the more formed culture on this earth westerners are noobs to the world hence why the extremeists are fighting to save thier culture.

america is invading arab culture and way of life and again democray says you can fight back if your being opressed and this is what they are doing.

there are two major cultures on this planet arab and western both are diffrent both if they callaborated could learn from each other and then prevent stupid wars.

america has summed up the arabs wrong and is fighting the arabs but what no one sees is that the arabs will probably triumph because they have had the past experiance personaly fighting the arab way of life is stupid there are far more arabs than westerners and 3/4 of them willing to fight.

if an arab walked into the white house and took control no one would like it so why should we do that to them?

clash of cultures definatly

[jumpy]

this cannot be called civilization (http://bareknucklepolitics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=126#126), by any stretch of the meaning of the word. :x

As unplesant as those images of the child and the truck seem/look/are, I hardly find the site they are posted on to be the voice of reason, in any sense of the word. Yes, it's shocking, and there's no denying that many aspects of islam in general (though mostly law and punnishment and extreemist treatment of infidels etc) are repugnant to many westerners, but there is just not enough information concerning those images to make an informed judgment as to the 'reality' of their content (I'm not condoning either a 'show' to earn cash, or a public display of 'punnishment' for stealing bread, though in the spirit of my post those views are pure speculation).
I know things can get somewhat heated on the boards here, but in two pages of posts on that site there were only two or three who seemed to have their heads not stuffed so far up their backsides that the only viewpoint they could see was small, puckered and stinky.
Yet again I find I am torn between a dangerous 'moral outrage' blinding me to the truth of what might really be happening and my sense of fairness and will to not just say 'ok, you wear a rag on yer head so you must be a barberous w**'.

Whatever your personal oppinion, I have to say I find posting such content more than a little biased- especially in the terms of its reference to this topic... fuel for the bonfire as it were, Avon Lady, no?
I understand completely that some of us here (and elsewhere) have very strong oppinons on certain 'cultural and religious butting of heads' but moral outrage or partisan religious belief is never a good place to start rational thinking and debate.
Sure, I have my own reservations and, at times, indignant anger over some of the things perpetrated in the name of islam, but the same can be said of any religion- most especially any religion comming from the middle east, with neither side willing to set asside the neverending animosity for the sake of peace. When you define yourself in terms of your religion -' A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion'- there's always going to be trouble when you meet someone with the same strength of belief comming the other way.
But I digress...
My vote is 'don't know' -clash of the cultures? only if we all sit back on our laurrels and let it happen.

[Sixpack]

Yes.

May the strongest win.

K.I.S.S.

[Kissaki]

It does NOT say...cut off thy brothers,neighbors, or anyone elses hand. Get it straight dude...


That's not the point. Interpretation is just that - people read what they want into texts, they hear what they want to hear. For example, you could have read my post for what it was, but you read something different entirely, either by subconscious choice or misunderstanding.

My point is that every "holy book" contains great amounts of prejudice. What matters, however, is how people choose to interpret what they read. How many times have you turned the other cheek, or loved your enemy? This is what Jesus preaches, yet Christianity has a pretty violent history. Interpretation, interpretation, excuses and interpretation.



You will not find anywhere in the "New Testament" that says anything about doing any ill will to a fly even.


You clearly forget about the fig tree, then.


SALT...Peace...Peace with ones self....and others...what a novel idea huh?

You realize how tempting it is to tell you to practice what you preach? Oopsie, I guess I just did :P


Another case point when it comes to interpretation is that the Old Testament is also part of the Bible. Anyone who wanted to could just quote lots of brutal passages there and conveniently not mentioning what's in the New Testament. Which is something I see even Christians doing, when they quote "an eye for an eye". And certainly, this injustice is dealt the Koran in spades, when Islamophobes try to find anything to discredit that religion. Get it right, dude.

[Kissaki]

if an arab walked into the white house and took control no one would like it so why should we do that to them?


Precicely. This is the sort of insight and reflection I'd like to see more people capable of. And I don't care that I ended that sentence with a preposition - in that case, it was the right thing to do :yep:

[August]

if an arab walked into the white house and took control no one would like it so why should we do that to them?


Precicely. This is the sort of insight and reflection I'd like to see more people capable of. And I don't care that I ended that sentence with a preposition - in that case, it was the right thing to do :yep:

Care to answer my question above?

[retired1212]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7f/Srebrenica6.jpg


Not so many people know about this event. Well, history calls it as Srebrenica massacre. A tight slap on the face of modren world.

Radovan Karadžić, Ratko Mladić and Radislav Krstić don't need to worry about any sort of justice. Anyway, at the end, a fine luxurious jail will be waiting for them. These characters are out of the news in these days though. :roll:

[Kissaki]

Care to answer my question above?

Certainly. Didn't mean to ignore you, but I had to catch a bus before. Anyway, you asked for a list of countries where they don't crush children's arms under trucks, as sanctioned by law. This list is by no means complete, but it's a start:

Turkey, Egypt, Morocco and in fact Iraq, and just about any country on the African continent, I think.

Now, I realize that atrocities do happen, and have happened, in Iraq and Morocco especially, and also certain local customs in various Muslim countries (which have nothing to do with Islam, though) are often viewed as atrocities in the West (I'm thinking of female circumcition in particular). But anyhow, whereas lots of atrocities occured under Saddam's regieme in Iraq, he was a secular leader and did not follow the Koran. And cutting off a hand for stealing was never part of Iraqi law, if I remember correctly. It is commonly associated with Iran, though, and in Indonesia masturbation is punishable with decapitation. So I'm told.

As for the atrocities in Morocco against civilians in the Western Sahara, the religious community there vehemently condems it. But like anywhere else, there will always be individuals, or individual groups, who take law and religion into their own hands. The picture Avon Lady linked to is a good example. I believe the store owner was a sadistic bastard who was fed up with kids stealing his bread, and when he managed to catch one of the little rascals he thought of a fitting punishment in his eyes, and why should he wait for the authorities? This of course is conjecture, but it's far more plausible than the government sanctioning it, however religious. Sure, there are countries that say you must pay for your theft with the loss of a hand, but that's done professionally and very quickly. What individuals do is a different matter, and reflects on the individual's level of sadism rather than faith. I don't think you'll even find the word "truck" in the Koran.

[August]

Well i don't think you'll find the penalty for stealing is having ones arm run over by a truck in any nations written law, Iran included. But similar things do happen in all Muslim countries and without exception they are either insufficiently discouraged or completely ignored by the societies those respective governments are supposed to represent.

[Kissaki]

Well i don't think you'll find the penalty for stealing is having ones arm run over by a truck in any nations written law, Iran included. But similar things do happen in all Muslim countries and without exception they are either insufficiently discouraged or completely ignored by the societies those respective governments are supposed to represent.

That I can agree with. Though it's still not something that regularly happens in every Muslim country.

[The Avon Lady]

The picture sequence of the child is not of a punishment for stealing. RETRACTION (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=18085_Sharia_Punishment_Photos_Misattribute d).

[Konovalov]

The picture sequence of the child is not of a punishment for stealing. RETRACTION (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=18085_Sharia_Punishment_Photos_Misattribute d).

Bravo. Thank you for the retraction. Things are not always what they seem. :)

[Kissaki]

The picture sequence of the child is not of a punishment for stealing. RETRACTION (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=18085_Sharia_Punishment_Photos_Misattribute d).

Well, I'm glad that wasn't actually the punishment of a little boy. The actual story behind the photos, however, is not much more comforting. :huh:

[The Avon Lady]

The picture sequence of the child is not of a punishment for stealing. RETRACTION (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=18085_Sharia_Punishment_Photos_Misattribute d).
Bravo. Thank you for the retraction. Things are not always what they seem. :)
And the kid was only 8. Now, had he been 14.................... (http://missmabrouk.blogspot.com/2005/10/ksa-to-execute-14-year-old-egyptian.html)

[Konovalov]

And from Amnesty International a record of countries executing child offenders: http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engact500042003

In the nine years between 1994 and 2002 Amnesty International recorded 19 executions of child offenders in five countries, a tiny fraction of the worldwide total of 22,588 executions recorded in 70 countries during the same period. A further execution was carried out in April 2003, bringing to 20 the number of recorded executions of child offenders since 1994. Thirteen of the 20 executions were in the USA. Within the USA there is a similar concentration of executions. Although 22 states currently provide for the death penalty against child offenders, the 22 executions of child offenders since 1977 have been carried out in just seven states. Sixteen of the 22 executions - over two thirds - were in Texas and Virginia. (See United States of America: Indecent and internationally illegal - the death penalty against child offenders, pp. 38-40, 99.) The 22 states that allow the use of the death penalty against child offenders are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, Nevada, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Wyoming.


Of the seven countries which have executed child offenders since 1990, two - Pakistan and Yemen - have since raised the minimum age to 18 in their laws. Saudi Arabia has since stated that it does not impose capital punishment on "children who have not attained the age of majority" (see below), and the authorities are not known to have executed any child offenders since 1992. There have been sporadic reports of such executions in Iran, but Iran has denied executing child offenders (see below). The two executions recorded in Nigeria and the Democratic Republic of Congo respectively were both of children convicted by special or military courts whose procedures did not conform to international norms for a fair trial; For details of cases, see Children and the death penalty: Executions worldwide since 1990, pp. 6-15.

neither country has admitted executing child offenders (see Appendix 3). The only country that openly continues to execute child offenders within the framework of its regular criminal justice system is the USA.


Care to add anything to the topic of discssion being the theory of a clash of civilizations?

[August]

Well i don't think you'll find the penalty for stealing is having ones arm run over by a truck in any nations written law, Iran included. But similar things do happen in all Muslim countries and without exception they are either insufficiently discouraged or completely ignored by the societies those respective governments are supposed to represent.

That I can agree with. Though it's still not something that regularly happens in every Muslim country.

That's a matter of debate but it brings us back to the concept of the Muslims cleaning their own house.

[Iceman]

Surah 5, verse 38:

As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power.

You don't get it, do you? Are your links the results of religious or philosophical or institutionalized convictions? Do national and religious leaders advocate intentionally inflicting such acts on others?

You just don't get it.
I take it that you voted yes to the poll question?
Yes.

The reference to male or female in the Holy Qu'ran for the Surah and Ayah that you quoted tie in with the Sharia and this is applicable if that person is a healthy adault, i.e. NOT a minor or a mentally disturbed person. This rule applies to hadd or hudud, tazir, and qisas crimes which are basically the groupings for the seriousness of the crime.

And further with regards to Ayah 38 of Surah 5 where this part of the Qu'ran touches on jurisprudence. The Canon Law jurists are not unanimous as to the value of the property stolen, but the vast majority hold that petty thefts are exempt from punishment such as the cutting off of a hand.

Perhaps you don't get it AL. May be you should stick to the Torah and Halacha.

Here is the part that is subject to interpretation I guess? Where does it say if they are healthy or where is it exactly that describes where or how to divide this passage?Please give some actual references not just your view.

To me this is a very clear passage.This is what I read from that passage...

Surah 5, verse 38:

As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power.

Hum it says for a thief cut off some limbs....Am I just dreaming this or is this what it says?

Please Please show me where this is not to be followed as punishment for thieving.

Please!

but the vast majority hold that petty thefts are exempt from punishment such as the cutting off of a hand.

Again where in the Holy book you follow says the vast majority does not have to follow this ..or is this another assumption on your part?

[Hitman]

All kind of horrible punishments and atrocities can be found in all holy books of all major religions...the old aztecs of Mexico even threw young ladies to mud holes, vulcans and ripped the heart of a living man alive as a sacrifice regularly....

What should be so strange about that, if you think that all those books were written during the early middle age at most, sometimes even older?

Didn't the jews kill the prostitutes by llapidation (Throwing stones to them)? Just the same as the muslims do with cheating wives....

I have no problem in agreeing that the geographical and sociopolitical situation of today's majority of muslim countries keeps them almost in the middle age in terms of civilization, so the vast majority of Islam is radical. But doesn't mean that there is no possible moderate interpretation of Quran, in my opinion. If we are to interpret the bible literally, we will be doing horrible atrocities, same as they were done in the middle age. I visited once a museum of the spanish holy inquisition and that was even more horrible than those pictures of the Iranian guy posted before.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/news/newsid_1379000/1379001.stm

Sorry the text is in spanish. Here's the short version in english: Two nuns sentenced to 15 years for helping in the genocide of 7000 people who searched asylum in their church, in Rwanda.

Are they good christians? Is the fact that they commit a crime in the name of God enough to say that the catholic religion is perverted?

Yes in the Islam this is more frequent, quite so when you see the situation in which their civilization lies, in terms of progress.

Do we see images like the punishment of the Iranian child in Turkey nowadays? No? Ain't they muslims? What is the difference between Turkey and Iran, then?

I lived once in germany during a whole month with a turk familiy. That was a summer back when I was in school and we had student exchange. The guy came later to us here at spain. He used to pray regularly to Allah, but did sleep on a bed where a cross was hung above, and did not complaint. He did not complaint if we had pig for lunch (Though my mother asked him repeteadly to cook something else if that offended him), and his answer always was: "I can eat this and see that to correspond your hospitality. Allah does not mind if we do little sacrifices for our friends. The fact that I already suffer eating it, is the correct punishment. It would be a sin if had pleasure and did it voluntarily, but I don't. Allah rewards those who are hospitalary and who are thankful to their friends. This is not an act against my religion but a sign of hospitality from you, and that is what counts."

Sorry, but as long as I can find guys like that, I will not think that it is the Islam itself what is wrong. :hmm:

[Sixpack]

deleted

[kiwi_2005]

america cant expect arab people to just drop thier way of life after thousands of years and adopt "american democracy" that goes against everything america stands for,

True. Although i think America want to make it better for places such as iraq. The truth is theres no way iraq is going to give up there ideas and adopt ours. Can't happen. Democracy in Iraq is gonna fail.

[Kissaki]

That I can agree with. Though it's still not something that regularly happens in every Muslim country.

That's a matter of debate but it brings us back to the concept of the Muslims cleaning their own house.

Taking the law into their own hands? And this is something peculiar to Muslims?

[August]

That I can agree with. Though it's still not something that regularly happens in every Muslim country.

That's a matter of debate but it brings us back to the concept of the Muslims cleaning their own house.

Taking the law into their own hands? And this is something peculiar to Muslims?

I didn't say that. Where would you get such an idea?

[Kissaki]

That I can agree with. Though it's still not something that regularly happens in every Muslim country.

That's a matter of debate but it brings us back to the concept of the Muslims cleaning their own house.

Taking the law into their own hands? And this is something peculiar to Muslims?

I didn't say that. Where would you get such an idea?

Because you keep portraying Muslims as shady characters because they might follow their own particular interpretation of Islam, rather than the actual law. That describes a criminal, following his own views on right or wrong. But your focus is solely on the Muslims, giving the impression that we have no criminals among ethnic Europeans.

[darksythe]

america cant expect arab people to just drop thier way of life after thousands of years and adopt "american democracy" that goes against everything america stands for,

freedom of speech
the initial right to do what you like when you like how you like

ok there are some real bad regiemes but the arab world is the more formed culture on this earth westerners are noobs to the world hence why the extremeists are fighting to save thier culture.

america is invading arab culture and way of life and again democray says you can fight back if your being opressed and this is what they are doing.

there are two major cultures on this planet arab and western both are diffrent both if they callaborated could learn from each other and then prevent stupid wars.

america has summed up the arabs wrong and is fighting the arabs but what no one sees is that the arabs will probably triumph because they have had the past experiance personaly fighting the arab way of life is stupid there are far more arabs than westerners and 3/4 of them willing to fight.

if an arab walked into the white house and took control no one would like it so why should we do that to them?

clash of cultures definatly


EXCUSE ME??? but the last itme i checked the Muslims are very much trying to invade all different aspects of american culture. Not to mention european. A few posts back we were talking about a group of muslims somewhere arguing that owners shouldnt be able to sell liqour out side there own property. Because it offneds them. Of course they would have you believe it was the children they were worried about. I think the initial post in this topic can X that right out of the realm of possabilities.

As far as nOObs to religion go, we are practicing the same religion that was practised in your neck of the woods so many years ago, You remember that christianity started over there(European areas.)

In the past few years our culture has changed dramatically to allow for the "Feelings" of others.

Oh and ive really got to say that it must be nice to have a society that encourages beating your women folk when they dont abide by your rules. Only after you have expressed your feelings about the tings she did wrong. if that doesnt work your supposed to kick her out of the bed for a month, and when all that doesnt work your encouraged to take a stick and beat the living daylights out of her.

Oh and lets not forget about the guy who returned from Mecca thinking his 13 or 14 yr old daughter was no longer a virgin....
And what did he do you may ask????

well quite simple actually, he sat all of his children down duck taped the girl and began to Slit her neck in front of her siblings!! THIS WAS HER FATHER!!!

What is the answer to all of this?

Can anyone say Glass Bowl?

[Kissaki]

EXCUSE ME??? but the last itme i checked the Muslims are very much trying to invade all different aspects of american culture. Not to mention european. A few posts back we were talking about a group of muslims somewhere arguing that owners shouldnt be able to sell liqour out side there own property. Because it offneds them. Of course they would have you believe it was the children they were worried about. I think the initial post in this topic can X that right out of the realm of possabilities.


This is just journalism. If you cared to quote more of that thread, you'd also see comments to the effect that these complaints were made by a very small (but highly vocal) minority within another minority. And that most Muslims don't mind piggy banks or out door servings of alcohol at all. Hell, I can even mention Christian groups who have made the same sort of complaints over here (with regards to alcohol). So your argument is really not usable, unless you're working for the Sun.


As far as nOObs to religion go, we are practicing the same religion that was practised in your neck of the woods so many years ago, You remember that christianity started over there(European areas.)


Thought it started in the Middle East?


In the past few years our culture has changed dramatically to allow for the "Feelings" of others.


Yes, we grew less xenophobic for a period after the war. Which I think is a good thing. But now it's coming back.


Oh and ive really got to say that it must be nice to have a society that encourages beating your women folk when they dont abide by your rules. Only after you have expressed your feelings about the tings she did wrong. if that doesnt work your supposed to kick her out of the bed for a month, and when all that doesnt work your encouraged to take a stick and beat the living daylights out of her.


It happens all over the world. We just pretend that we don't do it as much.


Oh and lets not forget about the guy who returned from Mecca thinking his 13 or 14 yr old daughter was no longer a virgin....
And what did he do you may ask????

well quite simple actually, he sat all of his children down duck taped the girl and began to Slit her neck in front of her siblings!! THIS WAS HER FATHER!!!


This is a cultural thing, and not limited to Islam. You see it, and similar things, as much in Hindu sections of India as well, but it is strictly forbidden by law. Those kinds of traditions are being combatted, but old habits die hard. Because this is not a problem confined to Islam, though, and because this does not occur in every Islamic country, the obvious conclusion must be: It is not a trait of Islam.

[Sixpack]

This is a cultural thing, and not limited to Islam. You see it, and similar things, as much in Hindu sections of India as well, but it is strictly forbidden by law. Those kinds of traditions are being combatted, but old habits die hard. Because this is not a problem confined to Islam, though, and because this does not occur in every Islamic country, the obvious conclusion must be: It is not a trait of Islam.

Alas, the matter is getting mixed up.

@Kissaki,

Islam only matters to us because it is getting more and more influential in our West. The question and debate is: Does the West want that to happen and if not: Do we still allow it by being liberal and tolerant ? It's our choice !

Islam in the ME and other significant muslim countries is just fine by me. It belongs there for a long time. It doesnt bother me as long as it's a domestic reli-cultural phenomenon there. But if an Iranian president starts the old Jihad rethoric against Israel and possibly seeks nuclear power for apparent reli-political reasons, how can I not be bothered by it ?

The islam-extremists are evidently causing major unrest in the world. And the moderate's silence is quite deafening. Even a blind and deaf person can notice that. Yet, you fail to notice it.

[August]

That I can agree with. Though it's still not something that regularly happens in every Muslim country.

That's a matter of debate but it brings us back to the concept of the Muslims cleaning their own house.

Taking the law into their own hands? And this is something peculiar to Muslims?

I didn't say that. Where would you get such an idea?

Because you keep portraying Muslims as shady characters because they might follow their own particular interpretation of Islam, rather than the actual law. That describes a criminal, following his own views on right or wrong. But your focus is solely on the Muslims, giving the impression that we have no criminals among ethnic Europeans.

Well you're making several assumptions that are just incorrect. I'm not casting all Muslims as shady characters. Care to detail where i have said or implied such a thing?

As for my focus, please check the title of this thread for clarification as to what I should be focusing on.

Did you mix me up with someone else again?

[Kissaki]

@Kissaki,

Islam only matters to us because it is getting more and more influential in our West. The question and debate is: Does the West want that to happen and if not: Do we still allow it by being liberal and tolerant ? It's our choice !


Isn't it a bit hypocritical to accuse others of intolerance if we fail to be tolerant ourselves? It's their right to practice their religion. And I say go for it. So what if people would prefer a "pure" society without foreign cultural elements? The world is in constant change, and a nation that refuses to change and embrace new elements stagnates. Just look at Iran (though it must be said, the Iranian people themselves tend to be liberal, and actually think well of the West).


Islam in the ME and other significant muslim countries is just fine by me. It belongs there for a long time. It doesnt bother me as long as it's a domestic reli-cultural phenomenon there. But if an Iranian president starts the old Jihad rethoric against Israel and possibly seeks nuclear power for apparent reli-political reasons, how can I not be bothered by it ?


I am bothered by the Troubles in Northern Ireland as well, but I'm not going to project that onto Protestants or Catholics elsewhere.

The islam-extremists are evidently causing major unrest in the world. And the moderate's silence is quite deafening. Even a blind and deaf person can notice that. Yet, you fail to notice it.[/quote]

But they are not silent. In fact, they are the first to speak up against the radicals. I don't know why they don't get more media attention, but even when they do it seems people aren't interested in reading or hearing about nice Muslims.

[Kissaki]

Well you're making several assumptions that are just incorrect. I'm not casting all Muslims as shady characters. Care to detail where i have said or implied such a thing?

As for my focus, please check the title of this thread for clarification as to what I should be focusing on.

Did you mix me up with someone else again?

Did you not say, and I quote, "That's a matter of debate but it brings us back to the concept of the Muslims cleaning their own house"? You don't actually state that it's all Muslims, but you do imply that the problems you mentioned are the result of being Muslim, which subsequently affect Muslims in general. I didn't say that you didn't allow for exceptions, but the fact that you seemingly treat "well-behaved" Muslims as exceptions says a lot. If I am wrong in these assessments, I apologize.

[August]

Did you not say, and I quote, "That's a matter of debate but it brings us back to the concept of the Muslims cleaning their own house"? You don't actually state that it's all Muslims, but you do imply that the problems you mentioned are the result of being Muslim, which subsequently affect Muslims in general. I didn't say that you didn't allow for exceptions, but the fact that you seemingly treat "well-behaved" Muslims as exceptions says a lot. If I am wrong in these assessments, I apologize.

Well you are wrong and are (deliberately i'm starting to think) reading all kinds of things into a very simple statement.

So for the last time i'll explain it. What i meant is, the west can bluster and bomb and sanction all they want, but the only true solution to Islamic terrorism is for the Muslims themselves to put a stop to it.

They know who is doing it, they know where they're doing it and they are the only ones that can root it out permanently.

Is that clear to you now? There's no racism here, i'm not calling anyone "well-behaved" or "exceptions", just a simple statement of fact.

[Abraham]

Did you not say, and I quote, "That's a matter of debate but it brings us back to the concept of the Muslims cleaning their own house"? You don't actually state that it's all Muslims, but you do imply that the problems you mentioned are the result of being Muslim, which subsequently affect Muslims in general. I didn't say that you didn't allow for exceptions, but the fact that you seemingly treat "well-behaved" Muslims as exceptions says a lot. If I am wrong in these assessments, I apologize.
Well you are wrong and are (deliberately i'm starting to think) reading all kinds of things into a very simple statement.You finally got it too, August?
Kissaki is putting words in his opponent mouth that never have been said nor intended and criticises others linking self-serving assumptions of dubious credibility with obvious truths that nobody in his right mind can deny.
Example:Isn't it a bit hypocritical to accuse others of intolerance if we fail to be tolerant ourselves? It's their right to practice their religion.It makes a conclusive debate rather difficult...

[Abraham]

@ Konovalov:
My answer to your poll has been "No".

I have been thinking about and reading a lot on the subject lately, the Quran, "Understanding Terror Networks" by Marc Sageman and some Dutch books.
My conclusion is that while there are tensions at points were civilisations touch, a clash, as in 'a violent battle' in which one of the participants is doomed, is unlikely.
Tensions between cultures have always existed. In the past those were confined to the geographic borders of those cultures. Modern international travel and communications can put substantial elements of other cultures in the heart of other cultures (Dubai being an example in the Middle East).
I think those tensions are normal.

Your underlying question is whether or not there would be a violent clash between Islam and it's neighboring cultures. While there might be clashes, even violent ones, a clash of 'Biblical' or 'Quranian' dimensions seems very unlikely in my opinion.
A realistic external threat does not exist. I can't foresee Arab countries or masses attacking the West in a way that would really shake our culture, unless through a multiple nuclear strike.
An internal threat does certainly exist, but it won't threaten much more than the borderline of Western culture. Although there are too many extremists and a substantial portion of Muslim society is willing to condome terror, it is still a minority of all Muslims. Most Muslims just want to live a better life in a better place and will one day realise that that place is only better because it is non-Muslim. Islam will never be close to a majority in any Western country. At the same time, history teaches us that any prolonged stay of a foreign social group in new environment, especially with an open and modern Western society, has a strong assimilating pulling force after a few generations.
What we perceive as the threat of Muslim fundamentalism may well be a desperate and doomed attempt to stick to threatened 7th century values in a 21th century society.
I also think that Muslim fundamentalism holds the seeds of its own destruction: the more it exposes itself and its backward values, the more the West will see it as a challenge, that in the end will actually deepen awareness of our own values. Furthermore, let's not forget that Muslim extremism is hopelesly internally divided both as theories and as actions are concerned...
Having said that, I do not exclude more violence on a limited scale, also against Muslims, as the autochtone population perceives its own values and freedoms as more and more threatened by Muslims.

The end is clear for all to see. Fundamental Islam will have to take a hard, critical and painful look at itself and adapt to modernity or remain a religion of underperforming countries and/or societies, irrelevant and not contributing to progress of the world society.

[caspofungin]

So for the last time i'll explain it. What i meant is, the west can bluster and bomb and sanction all they want, but the only true solution to Islamic terrorism is for the Muslims themselves to put a stop to it.

They know who is doing it, they know where they're doing it and they are the only ones that can root it out permanently.

Is that clear to you now? There's no racism here, i'm not calling anyone "well-behaved" or "exceptions", just a simple statement of fact.

i agree completely.

the only issue is that, if you are a muslim fighting against extremism, how do you get extremists to see beyond their narrow viewpoints? the task is made more difficult when for every example of peaceful intent that you give, someone else has an example of western hypocrisy or exploitation or whatever you wish to call it, that serves as a rallying cry for extremists?

e.g. the invasion of iraq. maybe it was done for altruistic reasons -- bringing democracy to the people of iraq. maybe it was done for security -- the unfound wmd. but some elements are always going to say, "they're here for the oil," or "they wish to impose their culture upon us."

so while i agree utterly with the 1st statement, i also believe that as long as there is a negative interaction with western culture -- in europe, the us, or in the m.e. -- it's going to make the job a lot harder.

[The Avon Lady]

[quote=August]the only issue is that, if you are a muslim fighting against extremism, how do you get extremists to see beyond their narrow viewpoints?
Why not simply show them how the Quran says otherwise and point out hsitorically how Muhammed and his immediate followers never practiced anything that we're seeing today.

Go ahead.

[caspofungin]

well, actually, there are clerics and teachers that do that. problem is, doesn't make for a good news story, does it? After all, I got my religious beliefs from somewhere, and i'm not strapping tnt to my body.

[The Avon Lady]

well, actually, there are clerics and teachers that do that. problem is, doesn't make for a good news story, does it? After all, I got my religious beliefs from somewhere, and i'm not strapping tnt to my body.
Where are there public dialogs?

And this would make great news stories! The mass media has bent over backwards to avoid mentioning the word Muslim or Islam in articles on war, Jihad and terrorism for years now.

Surely The Guardian is dying to publish such pieces and the more the merrier.

But there aren't any.

[caspofungin]

http://tedrowdrive.blogspot.com/2005/07/outrage.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040907/COSHEEMA07/TPComment/TopStories

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040907/ENEW07/TPComment/Editorials

from a non-focused google search, as examples.

[Kissaki]

You finally got it too, August?
Kissaki is putting words in his opponent mouth that never have been said nor intended and criticises others linking self-serving assumptions of dubious credibility with obvious truths that nobody in his right mind can deny.


Aren't we the pot calling the kettle black. I don't remember who, but I have been accused either directly or indirectly of "defending" the Nazies or various Islamic terror regiemes, for no better reason than me not hating them enough - and subsequently not portraying them as monsters or sub-human.


Example:Isn't it a bit hypocritical to accuse others of intolerance if we fail to be tolerant ourselves? It's their right to practice their religion.It makes a conclusive debate rather difficult...

To this I can only reply that since I joined Subsim, and peeked inside the General Forum, I have been blown off my feet with the levels of intolerance among some of the more vocal posters. Not only have people been making highly prejudicial remarks, but these remarks seem to be PC in here. What you just quoted me on isn't merely clever word-play: I hear people moaning about Muslim intolerance, while making it perfectly clear that they will certainly not tolerate any Islamic elements in their culture, thank you very much. Muslim immigrants are a hoarde of infiltrators, by the looks of it, hell-bent on destroying the fine European civilization. Muslims have been portrayed - and don't you deny it - as less than equal to us.

[The Avon Lady]

http://tedrowdrive.blogspot.com/2005/07/outrage.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040907/COSHEEMA07/TPComment/TopStories

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040907/ENEW07/TPComment/Editorials

from a non-focused google search, as examples.
The blog entry expresses outrage. So? How do that confront Islamic teachings?

Sorry, I'm not regustered to the Globe and Mail, so I cannot see the articles but the same point applies.

No one denies the existance of tons and tons of "moderate" Muslims. The question is their relevance in counterring what they claim is a distorted rendition of Islam.

[Kissaki]

http://tedrowdrive.blogspot.com/2005/07/outrage.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040907/COSHEEMA07/TPComment/TopStories

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040907/ENEW07/TPComment/Editorials

from a non-focused google search, as examples.
The blog entry expresses outrage. So? How do that confront Islamic teachings?

Sorry, I'm not regustered to the Globe and Mail, so I cannot see the articles but the same point applies.

No one denies the existance of tons and tons of "moderate" Muslims. The question is their relevance in counterring what they claim is a distorted rendition of Islam.

With all due respect, wouldn't they know better than you, though?

The proper interpretation of Islam, that is.

[The Avon Lady]

http://tedrowdrive.blogspot.com/2005/07/outrage.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040907/COSHEEMA07/TPComment/TopStories

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040907/ENEW07/TPComment/Editorials

from a non-focused google search, as examples.
The blog entry expresses outrage. So? How do that confront Islamic teachings?

Sorry, I'm not regustered to the Globe and Mail, so I cannot see the articles but the same point applies.

No one denies the existance of tons and tons of "moderate" Muslims. The question is their relevance in counterring what they claim is a distorted rendition of Islam.

With all due respect, wouldn't they know better than you, though?

The proper interpretation of Islam, that is.
Who would know better? Those sitting all their lives in a Madras in Pakistan, Riyahd, London or Falls Church, Virginia?

Or those who identify themselves as moderate Muslims who cannot seem to confront the former from a scriptural, historical and religious legal perspective?

Who? Who? Who?

With all due respect.

[caspofungin]

i hear a lot about how "moderate" muslims need to confront the extremists among us. i argue with my muslim friends about similar subjects, about what it is to be a muslim in the west. i learn all i can about my religion, pass that on to my younger siblings, and, god willing, will someday pass it on to my children.

so what else, specifically, would you like me personally to do?

[Dan D]

The hatred you find on both sides is a conscious creation of ideologies of our own troubled times.

The history of Bosnia teaches a lesson here, and what is striking, is the reversed perspectives:
Since the middle ages, Bosnia has been a society where cultural and religious influences from East and West have met and interacted. The history of the country is evidence of a successfully shared past, of centuries of pluralism and religious tolerance, under the rule of liberal Islamic Ottoman governors. Islam arrived in Bosnia more than 500 years ago with the armies of the Ottoman empire. More than half of the population by the 1700s adopted the triumphant faith of the Islamic conquerors.
This history is reflected in the buildings: in Bosnia you find Muslim, Christian and Jewish religious buildings constructed in the Ottoman centuries.

More than 1.000 of Bosnia’s mosques, hundreds of Catholic churches and scores of Orthodox churches, monasteries, private and public libraries, archives and museums were shelled, burned, dynamited during the Bosnia conflict 1992-1995, for the purpose of cultural and religious “cleansing”. The conflict, which started with an assault by Serb nationalist gunmen and the Serb-led Yugoslav National Army after the people of Bosnia had voted for independence, turned more than the half of the countries 4 million people into refugees and cost the lives of estimated 200.000 people. The international community was watching the genocide in Bosnia for 3 ½ years. Finally, the NATO led by the US without UN resolution (veto by China and Russia) began to destroy the infrastructure of the country with bombers and missiles (damage: estimated 50-75 % of the infrastructure ). The 1995 Dayton/Ohio peace agreement put the conflict to an end.
The reconstruction and protection of Bosnia’s rich multi-cultural heritage is not a matter to be ignored by the international community to leave the field open for Islamic fundamentalist aid agencies from the Arab world who have their own radical agendas and have little interest either in the preservation of heritage or in the promotion of interreligious and intercommunal harmony in Bosnia.
( http://www.aad.harvard.edu/alumni/images/from_the_ashes.pdf ; “from the ashes: the past and future of Bosnia’s cultural heritage” , Riedlmayer );

The Osamists of today would be happy to see the traditional liberal Islam on the Balkans being replaced by fundamentalist Islam.
Also: moderate Islamic leaders should point out to their people that the US military action in Bosnia (like that in Afghanistan ) gives an example that America like the West is not at war with the Islam. Bosnian Muslims do actually remember that US bomber pilots were involved to stop the “ethnic cleansing”.


more read:
http://hague.bard.edu/icty_info.html ; the Milosevic trial public archive, includes video sessions of the trial.
http://www.un.org/icty ; International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia

[Skybird]

You forgot to mention that throughout the better part of those 500 years all three religions/ethnicities from time to time enflamed in occasional clashes, that repeated again and again, a tradition of which 1992-95 only was the last example. And the "peaceful arrival" of Ottoman Islam on the Balkans you mentioned is not the history lesson that I read in the books. On the surface sometimes there may have been some more, sometimes less impression of peace, sometimes for decades. But in it's core the situation on the Balkan always held the flame of conflict in it's heart. Concerning Bosnia today: the EU's attempt to enforce an artificial creation on the maps with borderlines beeing drawn that try to enforce a level of community between all three ethnecities that simply is beyond reason is... at least it is struggling since years. I do not rule out that eventually a basis for another ceasefire will result from this that eventually will last for some years or even one or two decades. But peace is something different.

Serbian nationalism and pride in certain historical events in that region even not taken into account. Sentiments rising from that direction had been seen during the Kosovo war. The EU is trying to pack together too much and too different in too little space on the Balkans and especially kosovo and Bosnia. An artificial construction like what Bosnia is planned to be always will remain to be of high internal fragility. And we know by the example of other states that got that artificially created that such nations never come to rest and sooner or later brake out in flames again.

[Kapitan]

OMG is that realy you skybird ?

yay he is back :D

[The Avon Lady]

OMG is that realy you skybird ?
Maybe he auctioned off his SubSim account password on Ebay. :o

[Skybird]

OMG is that realy you skybird ?

yay he is back :D

Back then I wrote:
All these different reasons I listed sum up in a changed attitude of mine that makes me rethink my engagement here (amongst other factors as well), and I came to the conclusion that I do want to cut that part of my life dealing with this board much shorter in the future. Time for a change. I leave a small communication channel open and eventually pop up from time to time, but after five or even six years, I am not sure, I do consider my time of „hardcore membership“ at subsim.com beeing over. At least I will no more be as present as in past years, and keep a much lower profile.

And that'S what I do. Just the growing public discussion on Islam in the West, here as well as all around, gets my interest, and that's why I keep monitoring it. I consider it to be of top priorioty that the West finally clears up his mind on certain issues. That'S why I don't stay out completely.

i hear a lot about how "moderate" muslims need to confront the extremists among us. i argue with my muslim friends about similar subjects, about what it is to be a muslim in the west. i learn all i can about my religion, pass that on to my younger siblings, and, god willing, will someday pass it on to my children.

so what else, specifically, would you like me personally to do?

Maybe there is not much more you can do, I don't know. And maybe exactly< that is the problem, maybe this is one of the reasons why I question the wisdom of embracing Islam in the middle of Western communities. You choosed to orient your life to a ruleset that was created by very different kind of people thatvreally had nothing with you in common, like it or not, they were were a desert tribe, predatory traders, fighters, and in the end militant conquerors and dogmatized fanatics. Their way of thinking was different, and their knowledge was on a much lesser level. And now you ask why you cause friction with your attempt to follow their traditions in this modern Western and very different living surrounding...? Take this question as principle, not as a realistic request by me to leave: but why are you wanting to live a Muslim's life - in Christian West? Wouldn't it be far more logical if you live in a Muslim country, in harmony with the social realities around you? And compared to the reprisals foreign religions are facing in almost all Muslim countries, your problems are even minor, and harmless.

Your question is a bit as if I choose to live amongst Inuits in Alaska - and when they are irritated by my living habis of having a sauna and a thermal whirlpool in my round little ise-house tjhat threatens to melt some major holes into the iceplate the village is built upon, I tell them that I do not force them to do it like me - what else they expect from me in order to accept that I want to live with them, but in my way. The incompatabilty hardly could be overcome.

Somewhat comes down to this: you want to be one of us - then behave like one of us. I agree, to some growing degree difficult for a Muslim, maybe. In a Muslim country of your choice you would be able to do that easily. Don't pick French lessons if you want to learn Spanish.

[Kissaki]

Who would know better? Those sitting all their lives in a Madras in Pakistan, Riyahd, London or Falls Church, Virginia?

Or those who identify themselves as moderate Muslims who cannot seem to confront the former from a scriptural, historical and religious legal perspective?

Who? Who? Who?

With all due respect.

All of the above. Ultimately only Allah himself would know the absolute correct interpretation (in fact, to him it would be no "interpretation"), but we mortals must make the best out of what we've got. But one has to assume that a Muslim (be he Sunni, Shi'ite, Sufi or whatnot - liberal, moderate or radical) has studied his faith to such a degree as to be better informed than non-Muslims.

And, perhaps equally important if not more so: a Muslim regardless of sect has studied his religion with the bias of following it. Non-Muslims, in contrast, if they study the Koran at all, do not do so in order to follow it. Like I said earlier, when I first started studying the Bible it was mainly to beat the Christians in their own court. My bias was opposite from their's because I did not read the Bible as a Christian. Just like you don't read the Koran as a Muslim.

[The Avon Lady]

Who would know better? Those sitting all their lives in a Madras in Pakistan, Riyahd, London or Falls Church, Virginia?

Or those who identify themselves as moderate Muslims who cannot seem to confront the former from a scriptural, historical and religious legal perspective?

Who? Who? Who?

With all due respect.

All of the above.
Therefore, your prior claim that "they" would know better than us is irrelevant, as you're now saying that it could very well be that the Jihadists have got Islam down pat!
Ultimately only Allah himself would know the absolute correct interpretation
Praise be to Allaah.

The Qur’aan was revealed by Allaah, may He be glorified, as a law and a reference as to what is permissible and prohibited, what is commanded and forbidden, for people to follow, so that they obey its commands and abide by its prohibitions, take what it allows as permissible and take what it prohibits as forbidden. The Qur’aan tells us about what happened before and what is yet to come, and it is a reference for judging between us. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “… We have neglected nothing in the Book…” [al-An’aam 6:38].

After the Revelation was completed, Allaah said (interpretation of the meaning): “… This day, I have perfected your religion for you…” [al-Maa’idah 5:3].

The Sunnah [words and deeds of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)] came to explain and complement the Qur’aan. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I have been given the Qur’aan and something like it with it.” The phrase “something like it with it” refers to the Sunnah. (Saheeh hadeeth). Allaah commanded us to refer to these two constitutional references, when He said (interpretation of the meaning): “…if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allaah and His Messenger…” [al-Nisa’ 4:59]. Referring to Allaah means referring to the Qur’aan, and referring to His Messenger means referring to the Sunnah. The Qur’aan is the primary source of legislation, then comes the Sunnah. And Allaah knows best.
- SOURCE: What is the nature of the authority of the Qur’aan according to Muslims? (http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=2110&dgn=4)
But one has to assume that a Muslim (be he Sunni, Shi'ite, Sufi or whatnot - liberal, moderate or radical) has studied his faith to such a degree as to be better informed than non-Muslims.
I've never argued otherwise, though there are plenty of formerly fervant Muslims of all flavors that have been teaching us infidels what they were taught since infancy.
And, perhaps equally important if not more so: a Muslim regardless of sect has studied his religion with the bias of following it. Non-Muslims, in contrast, if they study the Koran at all, do not do so in order to follow it. Like I said earlier, when I first started studying the Bible it was mainly to beat the Christians in their own court. My bias was opposite from their's because I did not read the Bible as a Christian. Just like you don't read the Koran as a Muslim.
All I can say is so what? Who cares? My problem is not being blown up or stabbed or decapitated or mutilated or having my property destroyed or being kidnapped or.........................

And you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see what these strictly adherent Islamists base themselves on.

But enjoy your denial, while you still can.

[Kissaki]

All I can say is so what? Who cares? My problem is not being blown up or stabbed or decapitated or mutilated or having my property destroyed or being kidnapped or.........................

And you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see what these strictly adherent Islamists base themselves on.

But enjoy your denial, while you still can.

The Palestinians (who undoubtedly are your main concern) would've done what they are currently doing whether they were Muslim or not. Because of their situation, they will naturally look for interpretations in their religion sanctioning their actions. We've seen this thousands of times before, in Christianity, Hinduism, ancient mythology (take your pick) and even Buddhism. So when we see tolerant, benevolent people of all faiths, and they attribute their tolerance and benevolence to their religion, the fault must lie in people - not religion. To blame religion is like saying, "SH3 won't work with my graphics card. Damn, this card stinks." But then you hear from another person: "I have the exact same graphics card and SH3 works beautifully. The problem is with the driver, not the card."

Clever parable, huh? Just thought of it right now :know:

[Wim Libaers]

To this I can only reply that since I joined Subsim, and peeked inside the General Forum, I have been blown off my feet with the levels of intolerance among some of the more vocal posters. Not only have people been making highly prejudicial remarks, but these remarks seem to be PC in here.

Oh dear. The magical shield of Political Correctness has failed here, and now criticism of islam isn't taboo as you expect it to be. Call in the suicide bombers to clean up this forum perhaps?


What you just quoted me on isn't merely clever word-play: I hear people moaning about Muslim intolerance, while making it perfectly clear that they will certainly not tolerate any Islamic elements in their culture, thank you very much.

The problem with muslim intolerance is that it's so awfully close. I'd feel much more comfortable if they went to the middle of the Sahara to be intolerant.

Besides, let's generalise a bit and take for granted that we don't tolerate them, and they don't tolerate us. We were here first, they come to us. Conclusion: they're looking for trouble. The same could be said about the Americans in Iraq, but at least they openly admit it and have an overt war, while the others behave more like fifth columnists.


Muslim immigrants are a hoarde of infiltrators, by the looks of it, hell-bent on destroying the fine European civilization. Muslims have been portrayed - and don't you deny it - as less than equal to us.

Superiority of a culture is a very subjective thing. In case you're wondering, yes, I do think mine is superior. You're free to think yours is superior. I'm not going to cut your throat for that, problem is some of your culture do have nasty tendencies, and it turns out that it's hard to see in advance which ones are going to do crazy things. That might give an impression of a group of people that is, perhaps, nice on verage, but that can suddenly generate random maniacs out of the blue. An impression that is only strenghtened by reports that everybody who knew the terrorist considered him to be a very nice guy who would never do such things. If that's the situation, it should surprise no-one that some people start to become a bit suspicious, perhaps believing that the friendly muslim they just talked to today might try to blow them up tomorrow.

[Kissaki]

To this I can only reply that since I joined Subsim, and peeked inside the General Forum, I have been blown off my feet with the levels of intolerance among some of the more vocal posters. Not only have people been making highly prejudicial remarks, but these remarks seem to be PC in here.

Oh dear. The magical shield of Political Correctness has failed here, and now criticism of islam isn't taboo as you expect it to be. Call in the suicide bombers to clean up this forum perhaps?


Between shaving and cutting off one's head, there's bound to be a middle ground is all I'm saying.


Superiority of a culture is a very subjective thing. In case you're wondering, yes, I do think mine is superior. You're free to think yours is superior. I'm not going to cut your throat for that, problem is some of your culture do have nasty tendencies, and it turns out that it's hard to see in advance which ones are going to do crazy things.

Hang on a bit... my culture? My culture hasn't done anything "crazy" since our failed invasion of old Blighty in 1066. My location should read "Norway", and that's what I am - Norwegian thoroughbred.


That might give an impression of a group of people that is, perhaps, nice on verage, but that can suddenly generate random maniacs out of the blue. An impression that is only strenghtened by reports that everybody who knew the terrorist considered him to be a very nice guy who would never do such things. If that's the situation, it should surprise no-one that some people start to become a bit suspicious, perhaps believing that the friendly muslim they just talked to today might try to blow them up tomorrow.

Yes, well, the media isn't exactly doing much to help the situation. If there are three separate incidents of suicide bombings, and the media report all three, the impression given is that this happens all the time and that no one is safe. No one is ever completely safe, of course - you never know when a Boeing 727 is going to fall on top of your head. But the sense of immediate peril is greatly exaggerated.

[Abraham]

You finally got it too, August?
Kissaki is putting words in his opponent mouth that never have been said nor intended and criticises others linking self-serving assumptions of dubious credibility with obvious truths that nobody in his right mind can deny.Aren't we the pot calling the kettle black.I am not in the bussines of putting words in your mouth so I don't know what pot or kettle you're talking about.
Example:Isn't it a bit hypocritical to accuse others of intolerance if we fail to be tolerant ourselves? It's their right to practice their religion.It makes a conclusive debate rather difficult...To this I can only reply that since I joined Subsim, and peeked inside the General Forum, I have been blown off my feet with the levels of intolerance among some of the more vocal posters. Not only have people been making highly prejudicial remarks, but these remarks seem to be PC in here. What you just quoted me on isn't merely clever word-play: I hear people moaning about Muslim intolerance, while making it perfectly clear that they will certainly not tolerate any Islamic elements in their culture, thank you very much. Muslim immigrants are a hoarde of infiltrators, by the looks of it, hell-bent on destroying the fine European civilization. Muslims have been portrayed - and don't you deny it - as less than equal to us.I have nobody heard saying those things. I certainly tolerate Muslims, after all we are living in an open and free country (Holland) where foreigners have been welcomed through all centuries. Actually our society, like most Western societies has attained a level of tolerance that has - I sincerely think - never been reached in world history and can't be compared with the level of tolerance in - for instance - Muslim countries.
Furthermore the great majority of Muslims in Holland don't take their religion very serious anymore, less and less youngsters go to mosques. They just want to live a better live in our country and they are welcome to do so.
It's the minority that spoil things for all, cultivating sentiments of rejectment in order to find an excuse not to integrate.

Final request.
If you react to my statements, would you please react to my statements and leave remarks that I never made and never would make about unknown others who "will certainly not tolerate any Islamic elements in their culture, thank you very much. Muslim immigrants are a hoarde of infiltrators, by the looks of it, hell-bent on destroying the fine European civilization..." out of the equation, thank you very much!
I do not condone racist or discriminatory remarks, you see...

[Kissaki]

Aren't we the pot calling the kettle black.I am not in the bussines of putting words in your mouth so I don't know what pot or kettle you're talking about.

Nor I. I just calls 'em like I sees 'em.

I hear people moaning about Muslim intolerance, while making it perfectly clear that they will certainly not tolerate any Islamic elements in their culture, thank you very much. Muslim immigrants are a hoarde of infiltrators, by the looks of it, hell-bent on destroying the fine European civilization. Muslims have been portrayed - and don't you deny it - as less than equal to us.I have nobody heard saying those things.

No body spells it out like that, of course. But that's what the underlying message is. And that is probably why you have perceived my posts as "putting words in people's mouths": I confront people with the message they're sending, whether they intend it or not. I tell people quite frankly what impression they're giving - I am not in the business of twisting people's words for the fun of it.


I certainly tolerate Muslims, after all we are living in an open and free country (Holland) where foreigners have been welcomed through all centuries. Actually our society, like most Western societies has attained a level of tolerance that has - I sincerely think - never been reached in world history and can't be compared with the level of tolerance in - for instance - Muslim countries.

Ah, but here you show your prejudice. You say you tolerate Muslims, but you make your views on Muslim countries clear. And since we are all products of the culture we grow up in, it would be odd indeed if your view on Muslim countries didn't affect your views of the Muslims from those countries.

See? You didn't actually say these words, but it's a logical deduction. And that's ok, we all make such connections about many things. I'd be lying if I said that I'd be perfectly happy with my daughter marrying a Muslim man, because I'd have the feeling it would restrict her freedom and perhaps even endanger her. But I realize where those fears come from, and they certainly don't come from my own experience. So I surmise that my fears are largely irrational.


Furthermore the great majority of Muslims in Holland don't take their religion very serious anymore, less and less youngsters go to mosques. They just want to live a better live in our country and they are welcome to do so.
It's the minority that spoil things for all, cultivating sentiments of rejectment in order to find an excuse not to integrate.


That's what I've been saying all along!


Final request.
If you react to my statements, would you please react to my statements and leave remarks that I never made and never would make about unknown others who "will certainly not tolerate any Islamic elements in their culture, thank you very much. Muslim immigrants are a hoarde of infiltrators, by the looks of it, hell-bent on destroying the fine European civilization..." out of the equation, thank you very much!
I do not condone racist or discriminatory remarks, you see...

Very well. You'll be pleased to know that that particular comment was not directed at you or anyone in particular, though. It merely reflected my impression I got when I first sampled the political atmosphere here.

[Wim Libaers]

[quote]
Superiority of a culture is a very subjective thing. In case you're wondering, yes, I do think mine is superior. You're free to think yours is superior. I'm not going to cut your throat for that, problem is some of your culture do have nasty tendencies, and it turns out that it's hard to see in advance which ones are going to do crazy things.

Hang on a bit... my culture? My culture hasn't done anything "crazy" since our failed invasion of old Blighty in 1066. My location should read "Norway", and that's what I am - Norwegian thoroughbred.


OK, I confused you with someone else.



Yes, well, the media isn't exactly doing much to help the situation. If there are three separate incidents of suicide bombings, and the media report all three, the impression given is that this happens all the time and that no one is safe. No one is ever completely safe, of course - you never know when a Boeing 727 is going to fall on top of your head. But the sense of immediate peril is greatly exaggerated.

Well, the peril is immediate, in the sense they could strike anyone at any time. But the probability of being hit directly is, indeed, rather low. Still, that's no reason to ignore it, as they can have a big impact even if relatively few people get killed.

[caspofungin]

@skybird

Take this question as principle, not as a realistic request by me to leave: but why are you wanting to live a Muslim's life - in Christian West? Wouldn't it be far more logical if you live in a Muslim country, in harmony with the social realities around you? And compared to the reprisals foreign religions are facing in almost all Muslim countries, your problems are even minor, and harmless.

as principle, then...

i was born in the uk, i've lived there, i follow the laws, i pay my taxes. i've worked in ****ty jobs serving my fellow citizens, without regard for their colour or ethnicity or religion. As far as I'm aware, you don't have to be christian to submit to the values of freedom and equality that exist in the uk. so why can't i be muslim and live here -- why isn't that logical?

and regarding foreign religions in muslim countries -- if i visit germany or the us or the czech republic, i follow all the laws, not just the ones i agree with. when you go to saudi, you know you can't go around preaching christianity. if that's what you want to do, don't go there.

as regards people that are from a country but have a minority religion -- well, that's just one reason amongst many why those countries need to change in terms of their outlook on personal freedoms. i've never once argued against that, so please don't lay that at my feet.

and my problems are minor -- until i get arrested for being an arab in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[Abraham]

I hear people moaning about Muslim intolerance, while making it perfectly clear that they will certainly not tolerate any Islamic elements in their culture, thank you very much. Muslim immigrants are a hoarde of infiltrators, by the looks of it, hell-bent on destroying the fine European civilization. Muslims have been portrayed - and don't you deny it - as less than equal to us.I have nobody heard saying those things.No body spells it out like that, of course. But that's what the underlying message is. And that is probably why you have perceived my posts as "putting words in people's mouths": I confront people with the message they're sending, whether they intend it or not.No, you put words in other people's mouth as long as it fits your own prejudice of others and your own style of discussing.
You are not interested in my opinion and you never discuss my views. As you say: you confront people with the message they send you - you'd better frase it: "the (part of the) message you care to receive" - whether they intend it or not. You pretent to tell people quite frankly - thank you for your compliment - what impression they're giving, but if they correct you, if they feel like your own prejudice did prevent you from getting the meaning of their message, you refuse to pay attention and retort to attack statements that were made by nobody but must contain "the underlying message" - again according to you.
I am not in the business of twisting people's words for the fun of it.Ah, you see! "The underlying message" here is that you tacitly admit to be in the business of twisting people's words; you just don't do it for the fun of it.
Nice debating technique, isn't it. Makes one win any discussion...
I certainly tolerate Muslims, after all we are living in an open and free country (Holland) where foreigners have been welcomed through all centuries. Actually our society, like most Western societies has attained a level of tolerance that has - I sincerely think - never been reached in world history and can't be compared with the level of tolerance in - for instance - Muslim countries.Ah, but here you show your prejudice. You say you tolerate Muslims, but you make your views on Muslim countries clear. And since we are all products of the culture we grow up in, it would be odd indeed if your view on Muslim countries didn't affect your views of the Muslims from those countries.Would you care to change the word "prejudice" in "opinion about Muslim countries".
Constantly calling somebody's opinion a "prejudice" shows a clear disdain for and prejudice against opinions other then your own. Many of your postings are the living proof of that.
I said that I certainly tolerate Muslims and gave a valid reasoning for it. I spoke about the high level of tolerance in the West and compared that with the lack of tolerance in Muslim countries.
You obvious don't like my opinion, so you start some babbeling about us being "all products of the culture we grow up in" which leads you to the "logical deduction" that it would be "odd" if my criticism of Muslim countries didn't affect my view on Dutch Muslims.
Well, I have news for you.
You may call it "odd" or whatever, but I happen to base my opinion about people on the behaviour of those people and not on the political situation in their perceived country of origin. You see, many of them are happy to be in a more liberal and tolerant country like Holland.
See? You didn't actually say these words, but it's a logical deduction."Look at yourself and your shameful way of discussing... :down:
Your lengthy "deduction" is not a logical but a plain stupid one.
Indeed, I didn't actually say these words, but rephrasing and twisting my opinion makes life a whole lot easier for you.
Some might call that "putting words in someone's mouth".
You call it "OK".
I don't.
Furthermore the great majority of Muslims in Holland don't take their religion very serious anymore, less and less youngsters go to mosques. They just want to live a better live in our country and they are welcome to do so.
It's the minority that spoil things for all, cultivating sentiments of rejectment in order to find an excuse not to integrate.
That's what I've been saying all along!If you had not spent your time twisting my words but reading my opinion you should have seen that it is a "logical deduction" of the views I hold and have been stating all along.
Final request.
If you react to my statements, would you please react to my statements and leave remarks that I never made and never would make about unknown others who "will certainly not tolerate any Islamic elements in their culture, thank you very much. Muslim immigrants are a hoarde of infiltrators, by the looks of it, hell-bent on destroying the fine European civilization..." out of the equation, thank you very much!
I do not condone racist or discriminatory remarks, you see...
Very well. You'll be pleased to know that that particular comment was not directed at you or anyone in particular, though.If you leave your comments not directed to me out of your specific answers to me there is a gleam of hope for a more normal discussion.

[Dan D]

Decision by the European Court of Human Rights regarding culture clash in Turkey:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4424776.stm
In political terms, the Turkish state won, the Turkish governing party, the conservative-Islamic AKP lost the case.
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that the headscarf ban at universities and private schools does not violate the base right of education and religious freedom.
As a consequence, Turkish universities can go on kicking out female students who refuse to take off their headscarf.
The Turkish prime minister Erdogan had said last week, that wearing a headscarf is a “human right”.
The Turkish president Sezer, on the other hand, with ostentation disinvites all wives of the governing party politicians who wear a headscarf from meetings.


This raises some questions:

Is Turkey doomed now? Will there be a jihad in Turkey soon?
Whom gonna vote conservative Muslims next time?
Will this dampen the Turkish interest to become a member of the European Union?
Where do headscarf wearing daughters of Turkish governing party politicians and of other Muslim elite study if not in Turkey?

It is at least known that the daughters of the Turkish prime minister are studying at universities in the USA. There, they are allowed to wear a headscarf. Will those daughters spread Islam in USA? Will they come home munching chewing gum?
http://www.bepc.de/phpbb2/images/smiles/20_ani_patsch.gif