Go take the camel...

[Abraham]

Last Wednesday, the international train from Frankfurt to Amsterdam was stopped, just before entering Amsterdam Central Station, on order of the police and security services after several alarming phonecalls from passengers. Several passengers reported two Arab-looking young men in jhebalah' (long white ceremonial robes) with backpacks entering a toilet together.

There was a terror alarm, the train was evacuated, all railroad traffic to and from the Eastern entrance of Amsterdam Central Station was blocked and a SWAT team arrested the two and led them away, handcuffed, over the rail emplacement. The train was searched for explosives but nothing was found. After hours of delay and heavy inconvenience for thousands of passengers the railroad traffic was resumed.

Amsterdam is a place of tolerance, where, untill recently, the fact that two young Muslim men would enter a toilet together would hardly have raised an eyebrow. Its only after the events in Madrid and especially London that the Dutch are more aware they belong to the enemies of radical Islam and that terror attacks might occur in Holland as well.
However, this time it was false alarm. After questioning the suspects the Police reported them to be fundamental Muslims in religious dress, coming back from friends in Germany where they had celebrated Ramadan. They felt obliged to conduct a ritual cleaning of themselves and therefor entered a toilet. No sweat...

Well, no sweat...?
In a sense it is really worrysome that people in 21th century Europe feel the urge and the freedom to perform these 7th century totally outdated religious rituals outside the privacy of their homes in total disrespect of the fear, the iritation and the nuisance that they cause with the normal passengers. That fear was quite rational and installed among normal people by their extremist Muslim brothers after the recent string of suicide bombings in public transportation services abroad.

Go figure this:
1. Backward 'progressives', who still can't let go the multi-culti-soci-fairy, called the passengers "stupid" for thinking that these people would commit a terrorist act, being so obviously dressed as devote Muslims... the lesson apparently being to consider anybody with Arab features a threat.
2. The lawyers of the two innocent Muslims are considering a legal claim for damages against the Dutch Railroad and/or the Dutch police...
3. The lawyers of the Dutch Railroad are not considering a legal claim for damages against the two Muslims... which would really be the long term solution for the problem: they are obviously in Holland because they prefer the better living to their own country, so let them pay for the damages that introducing their own country's habits caused the Dutch society.

When I read this story it reminded me of a posting of Skybird several months ago, in which he reported seing an RTL TV item about the in the reopened Mont Blanc tunnel. According to Skybird an surveillance camera captured a car driver stopping his car at an emergency stop in the tunnel in order to perform his daily prayers...

Few things do more to express the gaping cultural divide between modern Western society and fundamental Muslims.
My personal reaction was: if they really want to re-enact a 7th century desert society why not take a horse or a camel. That's what Mohammed (peace be upon him) would have done. It certainly adds to the immersion and as an incidental circumstance it doesn't scare normal passengers.

[Gizzmoe]

they are obviously in Holland because they prefer the better living to their own country, so let them pay for the damages that introducing their own country's habit causes Dutch society.

Why are you saying "better living to their own country"? Maybe they were born and raised in Holland? Dutch muslims, they do exist and they are part of the Dutch society.

In the part of Düsseldorf were I live almost 20% of the population are Muslims. I have never see them as a danger, they are an important part of our society since more than 40 years. I love cultural diversity, it can be a great gift.

[Abraham]

they are obviously in Holland because they prefer the better living to their own country, so let them pay for the damages that introducing their own country's habit causes Dutch society.
Why are you saying "better living to their own country"? Maybe they were born and raised in Holland? Dutch muslims, they do exist and they are part of the Dutch society.If so, they have a lot to learn...
They might or might not have been Dutch in nationality. If so, they had certainly a double nationality. More important, they were not adapted to the current demands of Dutch society. I bet if you asked them what they were they would probably not have answered: "Dutch."

I love cultural diversity as much as most Dutch and consider it a historic acquisition of our society. It has added to what we Dutch have become as a people. And the funny thing is most cultures therefor hardly pose any problem in Holland. Race in Amsterdam we hardly notice.

But you are right to make a critical remark, because practicing these rituals in public transportation in these times did really snap something with me: the total disdain and indifference towards public sentiments in their host society really pizzed me off more than is characteristic for me!
:-?

[Gizzmoe]

the total disdain and indifference towards public sentiments in their host society really pizzed me off more than is characteristic for me!

You said it again. "Host society"! Sorry, but I slowly get the feeling that you have a problem to accept that Muslims can be an integral part of Holland or Germany or any other "western" country! They don´t have to be 100% like "us", they can do whatever they want as long as it isn´t against the law. It has not much to do with "disdain" and "indifference".

I admit that it maybe wasn´t a very wise decision to wear such a religious outfit in those times, but they probably wore them every Ramadan before 9/11, Iraq, Madrid and London, why should they change it now? Because it makes (as you put it) "normal" people feel uncomfortable? It´s a religious thing! We are not in a position to tell them what to wear or not. That incident only shows that a part of our society is f*cked up. Not those two guys have a real problem, the others have!

If it was one of the terrorists goals to try to divide Muslims and Christians they had a partly success, as the train example has shown.

[Col7777]

The thing that caused the alarm was not what they were wearing as such but because they were seen entering the toilet with backpacks.
Plus they were only going in to get a wash which other people are allowed to do and in relative privacy.

[Abraham]

the total disdain and indifference towards public sentiments in their host society really pizzed me off more than is characteristic for me!
You said it again. "Host society"!Ooops, I was politically incorrect?
Sorry, but I slowly get the feeling that you have a problem to accept that Muslims can be an integral part of Holland...Muslims? Not at all! Fundamental Muslims? Only if they express their culture in a way that really isn't accepted by Western culture. Of course (t)hey don´t have to be 100% like "us", they can do whatever they want... neither is it very relevant if I have a problem with it. The point is that certain outdated cultural habits (it has nothing to do with freedom of religion) are not acceptable or not accepted by modern Dutch society. Take the newest hype of radical Muslima's of covering themselves completely by accepting the burqua as standard clothing, in public and during work...
That incident only shows that a part of our society is f*cked up. Not those two guys have a real problem, the others have!Yep, I fully agree. Muslim extremists caused a real problem, now we have it!

[Skybird]

You said it again. "Host society"! Sorry, but I slowly get the feeling that you have a problem to accept that Muslims can be an integral part of Holland or Germany or any other "western" country! They don´t have to be 100% like "us", they can do whatever they want as long as it isn´t against the law. It has not much to do with "disdain" and "indifference"..

You illustrate what exactly the West's problem in realizing Islam is: "they can do as they want as long as it is not against the law". That way you reduce Europe to a bureaucratical meaning only. But I understand Europe as a cultural sphere in the first, and it's history was heavily influenced - sometimes for the good, sometimes for the worse - by the religion that has become typical for Europe since the empire of Rome: and that is not Islam that started to constantly attack europe since the 8th century until the 16th century and brought it two times to the brink of brakedown, but Christianity. Even after the Turk's attack on Vienna the relation between Europe and the weakening Muslim Ottoman empire were fragile and focussed on the possebilites of more wars to come. The theory that Islam and Europe peacefully coexisted in past times in history is a complete myth. Their relation has been dominated by war and violance from the defeat of Roderich in 711 (just 80 years after Muhammad's death - the whole African coast lies beyond both events!) until today's heavily damaged relations between both spheres. Islam never has had a historical tradition in Europe, and where it is present in minor regions (Balkans, Hungary), it has been enforced there by violance (Ottoma empire), and has conserved enthnical tensions that every couple of decades light up, since centuries.

I expose myself to critizism of beeing politically uncorrect, but I put it clearly: Europe ends where European Christianity in the tradition of Western Rome's history ends, and it is here where I want to see Islam's drive into the West beeing brought to a halt - period. The orthodox Christian tradition reaching far into the russian and Middle East direction already is critical, but some of it's territories that do not reach too far to the East I do accept and think of as Europe., nevertheless, becasue of shared history. The line is somehwere in the Eastern half of the Baltic states, Belarus, wstern Ukraine, western Romania, the Northern part of the Balkans, the Eastern part of Greece.

This is not about my personal confessions. I am no Christian. It is about realizing the importance of religion as a deciding factor for one's own culture - and identity. And the ideology of Islam does not work well with that typical identity of Western culture and the values that emerged from that.

Empires of the past did not have solid borders, just peripheral territories near their defined borders where their cultural and administrative influence started to phase out and became the weaker the farther away these territories were from the empire's coreland and center. In this understanding Europe is is desperate need to think of it self in an imperial understanding. The idea of solid borders where it ends is idiotic - it has never been like that. There needs to be a belt of Europe phasing out, and non-Europe phasing in. Current policies of the EU do not reflect thios need, thus their headless rushing to the East.

[Abraham]

I was really missing your contribution, Skybird...
When I read this story it reminded me of a posting of Skybird several months ago, in which he reported seing an RTL TV item about the in the reopened Mont Blanc tunnel. According to Skybird an surveillance camera captured a car driver stopping his car at an emergency stop in the tunnel in order to perform his daily prayers...

[caspofungin]

@abraham

In a sense it is really worrysome that people in 21th century Europe feel the urge and the freedom to perform these 7th century totally outdated religious rituals

i thought the modern judaeo-christian tradition was all about individual freedoms. are those freedoms limited to certain segments of society?

Outdated religious rituals -- like baptism, or using a rosary in prayer, or kneeling to pray, or singing in church? Religious rituals are an integral part of any religion.

they are obviously in Holland because they prefer the better living to their own country, so let them pay for the damages that introducing their own country's habits caused the Dutch society.

maybe that's part of the problem. maybe those 2 guys were born and raised in holland. maybe they served in the dutch military. maybe they see themselves as good dutch citizens. but yourself and the majority of your countrymen will never see them as dutch -- they'll always be "immigrants" even if they've been born there, or at best "dutchmen of arabic origin." a lot of people have brought up isolationism as part of the problem of having a muslim minority i a country, but isolationism can come from both sides of a cultural divide.

i've only visited holland once (nice place) but i was born and raised in the uk. but if i walk into a pub, with my dark skin and my "funny" name, the first assumption that some people -- probably the majority -- leap to is that i'm from somewhere else. No matter what ive done for or feel for my country, there's always going to be that element of being a stranger in your own home.

is it any surprise that some people are going to fill that vacuum of needing to belong to something greater than your individual self by identifying more strongly with a rreligios community than the secular society that seems to "reject" them?

[caspofungin]

@skybird

i understand and respect your opinion. but cultural isolationism is hard to implement, and even harder to maintain.

The theory that Islam and Europe peacefully coexisted in past times in history is a complete myth

absolutely agree with you there. any time you have 2 cultures with different viewpoints, there's going to be friction -- either simmering just below the surface or exposed as all-out war. That friction occurs whether it 2 empires abutting, or a minority culture in the midst of another.

How do you ease that friction?

Islam that started to constantly attack europe since the 8th century until the 16th century and brought it two times to the brink of brakedown

whatever i think of that comment's accuracy, answer this -- what has happened since the 16th century? what has happened in the last 100 years? The history of aggression is not unilateral. but this is a digression...

[Abraham]

@abraham
In a sense it is really worrysome that people in 21th century Europe feel the urge and the freedom to perform these 7th century totally outdated religious rituals
i thought the modern judaeo-christian tradition was all about individual freedoms. are those freedoms limited to certain segments of society?No Caspofungin, those freedoms are for all to enjoy. Therefor nobody will stop these young Muslims from going to a mosque and perfroming their religious duties. What they did is not even frobidden by law and they were of course set free. But it shows total indifference and lack of understanding of Dutch culture to confront others with religious rituals especially under the current circumstances. Some passengers were really scared. If you want to integrate and behave like a 'proper' Dutchman, you keep your personal religion where it belongs, in your personal domain and/or your local house of worship. They could have washed themselves at home, couldn't they?
Outdated religious rituals -- like baptism, or using a rosary in prayer, or kneeling to pray, or singing in church? Religious rituals are an integral part of any religion.I wouldn't call baptism, praying and singing outdated rituals. And they are very much allowed, of course, for any religion.
Though it would not scare other passengers if somebody would start praying a rosary in the middle of a traintrip, because the obvious connection with terrorism wouldn't be there, it would certainly raise eyebrows and lack of understanding, just as most spontanous public displays of religious rituals would.
they are obviously in Holland because they prefer the better living to their own country, so let them pay for the damages that introducing their own country's habits caused the Dutch society.maybe that's part of the problem. maybe those 2 guys were born and raised in holland. maybe they served in the dutch military. maybe they see themselves as good dutch citizens.That's a real long shot, with all those maybe's...... but yourself and the majority of your countrymen will never see them as dutch -- they'll always be "immigrants" even if they've been born there, or at best "dutchmen of arabic origin."If they do not integrate - which is not the same as assimilate, yes. If they try to be Dutchmen they will be regarded as such by most Dutch.
Just as the new generation of blacks and Hindustans from Surinam origin is almost totally integrated and regarded as real Dutch.
i've only visited holland once (nice place) but i was born and raised in the uk. but if i walk into a pub, with my dark skin and my "funny" name, the first assumption that some people -- probably the majority -- leap to is that i'm from somewhere else. No matter what ive done for or feel for my country, there's always going to be that element of being a stranger in your own home.I sincerely think that's very much up to yourself and your behaviour, as far as Holland is concerned. If you would speak Dutch and be dressed in a casual way, nobody would give a damn about the colour of your skin or your "funny" name. If you would add that you are Muslim, people would say: "Well, nice" and continue to talk about Ajax and the weather.
You would however attrack some mild attention if you would speak Arab and walk around in 7th century re-enactment gear and you might certainly experience the feeling of being a stranger in your own place, but then, if you behave like that it's not your own place, because you have not made the cultural connectionand make a statement of it.
By the way, if I would make a habit from walking around in futuristic Star Trak-clothing I would probably experience the same reactions.
is it any surprise that some people are going to fill that vacuum of needing to belong to something greater than your individual self by identifying more strongly with a rreligios community than the secular society that seems to "reject" them?No, but then again, knowing the Dutch attitude towards immigrants over the past decades - which has been leaning backwards to make people feel at home and equally treated - I am deeply convinced that the rejection came from those fundamentalists first and foremost and then triggered a predictable response from the average Dutchman. As you said pointedly: "isolationism can come from both sides of a cultural divide."

[caspofungin]

But it shows total disdain and lack of understanding of Dutch culture to confront others with religious rituals especially under the current circumstances. Some passengers were really scared. If you want to integrate and behave like a 'proper'Dutchman, you keep your personal religion where it belongs, in your personal domain and/or your local house of worship

but they stepped into the toilet, right? how is that confrontational? weren't they performing their rituals in private?

I wouldn't call baptism, praying and singing outdated rituals.

i wouldn't either -- but washing or ritual cleansing is?

the obvious connection with terrorism

no, there's an obvious connection with islam. your fellows are the one making the "logical" leap.

That's a real long shot, with all those maybe's...

but not impossible. after all, who could anyone know? i mean, the cops knew, once they'd actually spoken to them...

if you behave like that it's not your own place, because you have not made the cultural connectionand make a statement of it.

fair enough...

knowing the Dutch attitude towards immigrants over the past decades - which has been leaning backwards to make people feel at home and equalLY treated - I am deeply convinced that the rejection came from those fundamentalists first and foremost and then triggered a predictable response from the average Dutchman.

i honestly don't know enough about holland and other european countries to make a judgement. my only experience has been in the uk. and i agree that some immigrants, at least in recent years, take the easy route and just melt into their little ethnic enclaves. but some don't, some try to assimilate, and while ssome may do so successfully, others won't, for a variety of reasons.

it all depends on your perspective.

"isolationism can come from both sides of a cultural divide.

at least we can both agree on that. ;) [/quote]

[bradclark1]

Several passengers reported two Arab-looking young men in jhebalah' (long white ceremonial robes) with backpacks entering a toilet together.

If I saw this my anxiety level would skyrocket. Why would two men enter a toilet together? Well, besides being gay. Arabs in religious dress with ruck sacks would send my alarm bells ringing. They wanted to dress nice to meet Allah? Sad? Yes but thats the state of the world we live in. To me the arabs should have known better. And then, perhaps they wanted to freak people out. It has been arabs commiting acts of terrorism. Not midgets but arabs.
If it looks like a duck Walks like a duck. Quacks like a duck. Its a duck until proven otherwise. Thats reality.

[Abraham]

@ Broadclarck1:
They moved around from one toilet to the other, speaking Arab among them. It later turned out that they were checking which toilet was clean enough for their ritual...
But it shows total disdain and lack of understanding of Dutch culture to confront others with religious rituals especially under the current circumstances. Some passengers were really scared. If you want to integrate and behave like a 'proper'Dutchman, you keep your personal religion where it belongs, in your personal domain and/or your local house of worshipbut they stepped into the toilet, right? how is that confrontational? weren't they performing their rituals in private?Dear caspofungin, are you pulling my leg? First of all a toilet in a train is not a private place, but a private in public transportation. Rightly or wrongly their behaviour attracked attention and scared several passengers. There have been bombings in means of public transportation recently...
I wouldn't call baptism, praying and singing outdated rituals.i wouldn't either -- but washing or ritual cleansing is?Yes, certainly. Very hygienic and necessairy in the desert, but most people in Holland have the opportunity to take regular showers or baths nowadays. That outdates the ritual cleaning.
But again, it's not forbidden. But if you want to integrate, do it in your home.
How about the situation on the other side of the hill? If I would be a Minister or a Priest, walking in my traditional religious clothes with a cross or a crucifix around my neck and a Bible under my arm in any orthodox Muslim country, could I call on any understanding if I was preaching, praying or performing religious rituals in the public arena? Posing the question is answering it.
We should realise that the often criticized West gives all religions a level of freedom that is unheard of in other cultures. This is guaranteed by the separation of State and Church, because no religion or religious law can effectively guarantee the freedom of others to practize their religion.
knowing the Dutch attitude towards immigrants over the past decades - which has been leaning backwards to make people feel at home and equalLY treated - I am deeply convinced that the rejection came from those fundamentalists first and foremost and then triggered a predictable response from the average Dutchman.
i honestly don't know enough about holland and other european countries to make a judgement. my only experience has been in the uk. and i agree that some immigrants, at least in recent years, take the easy route and just melt into their little ethnic enclaves. but some don't, some try to assimilate, and while ssome may do so successfully, others won't, for a variety of reasons.I would suggest you sniff up the atmosphere for a long weekend or so. It only takes a 40 minutes flight to Schiphol or a ferry to Hook of Holland. You'll like Amsterdam and I'ld certainly like to share a drink with you...
:D

[caspofungin]

Rightly or wrongly their behaviour attracked attention and scared several passengers.

i appreciate that, and understand it, and maybe they could have been more tactful or something. all i'm saying is that it seems funny to me to blame the public response on those 2 guys -- i understand the response, and i guess if my anxiety level was high and i was in their position i might do the same -- but all they were doing was practising their religion, which they're entitled to do.

have the opportunity to take regular showers or baths nowadays. That outdates the ritual cleaning

that's why its ritual.

We should realise that the often criticized West gives all religions a level of freedom that is unheard of in other cultures...

i do realise it, and appreciate that freedom.

If I would be a Minister or a Priest, walking in my traditional religious clothes with a cross or a crucifix around my neck and a Bible under my arm in any orthodox Muslim country, could I call on any understanding if I was preaching, praying or performing religious rituals in the public arena?

it's not against the quran, but illegal in many countries -- not all -- that's the law those countries have decided to enact and enforce. that repression is conducted against their own citizens, too, which is one of the many reasons people choose to emigrate to the west.

I would suggest you sniff up the atmosphere for a long weekend or so. It only takes a 40 minutes flight to Schiphol or a ferry to Hook of Holland. You'll like Amsterdam and I'ld certainly like to share a drink with you...

i'd love to take you up on it-- unfortunately i'm in the u.s. for now, on a visa, so if i left i'd have issues getting back in. maybe soon, though.

[The Avon Lady]

If I would be a Minister or a Priest, walking in my traditional religious clothes with a cross or a crucifix around my neck and a Bible under my arm in any orthodox Muslim country, could I call on any understanding if I was preaching, praying or performing religious rituals in the public arena?
it's not against the quran, but illegal in many countries -- not all -- that's the law those countries have decided to enact and enforce. that repression is conducted against their own citizens, too, which is one of the many reasons people choose to emigrate to the west.
Sura 9, verse 29:

29. Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

This is the essence of dhimmitude.

Refer to the last words: "and feel themselves <the non-Muslim dhimmis> subdued". What are the historic precendents and methods used by Muslim rulers to achieve this feeling of subjugation?

[caspofungin]

we've had similar arguments before, on other threads. in fact, you've quoted that before, right? for every sura you quote, i can quote one with a different "twist" on the relationship between muslims, jews, and christians.

we could sit here all day, quoting and counter-quoting, but the point, the very marrow of any argument about the relationship between islam and the west, is the interpretation of the quran.

true, some muslims will feel it is their duty to fight non-muslims. others will feel that there is a common bond between "people of the book."

so arguing about suras, quoting out of context or from different translations which make different implications, gets us nowhere. the topic of the thread is about muslims in western countries -- about certain groups which link religion to all aspects of life living in a secular society.

and personally speaking, the things that get my goat, that make me mad in terms of my personal relationship with western culture or societies, are how arabs and muslims are viewed and treated by some elements of western culture -- nothing rpt nothing to do with my personal interpretation of the quran. i'm sure that's true for a lot of other muslims too.

[caspofungin]

the quran hasn't changed since the 7th century. the relationship between islam and the west has. so the question should be, what's changed in the last 5-10 years that has lead to a surge in the numbers of islamic extremists dedicated to attacking the west?

[Skybird]

the quran hasn't changed since the 7th century.

Muslim belief that is, I know, but nevertheless extremely questionable from historical research's perspective. Historcial events and fundamental changes in Arab language let it appear as an impossebility that it "hasn't changed since the 7th century". I'll come to that in some days.

[The Avon Lady]

Getting back on topic, actually, a camel might be one of the faster transportation options in Paris (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051106/ap_on_re_eu/france_rioting;_ylt=Asv.nMn2LyUmsMAnDUXV.Mas0NUE;_ ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--), at the moment.

[Kissaki]

Several passengers reported two Arab-looking young men in jhebalah' (long white ceremonial robes) with backpacks entering a toilet together.

If I saw this my anxiety level would skyrocket. Why would two men enter a toilet together? Well, besides being gay. Arabs in religious dress with ruck sacks would send my alarm bells ringing. They wanted to dress nice to meet Allah? Sad? Yes but thats the state of the world we live in. To me the arabs should have known better. And then, perhaps they wanted to freak people out. It has been arabs commiting acts of terrorism. Not midgets but arabs.
If it looks like a duck Walks like a duck. Quacks like a duck. Its a duck until proven otherwise. Thats reality.

If they wore Muslim religious attire, I would naturally assume they were going to wash their face, hands and feet before prayer.

Here's a clue to identifying terrorists: They look like everybody else! They try to avoid obvious things such as wearing religious attire, entering restrooms in groups, looking mean and dangerous etc. Think about it: If you were plotting some foul play, wouldn't you want to be as inconspicuous as possible? Those who flaunt their religion are SO not the ones to worry about.

[Kissaki]

Go figure this:
1. Backward 'progressives', who still can't let go the multi-culti-soci-fairy, called the passengers "stupid" for thinking that these people would commit a terrorist act, being so obviously dressed as devote Muslims... the lesson apparently being to consider anybody with Arab features a threat.

Well, this is demonstrably the case.


2. The lawyers of the two innocent Muslims are considering a legal claim for damages against the Dutch Railroad and/or the Dutch police...

Perfectly understandable. If you were arrested and carried off in full public view for doing nothing wrong, wouldn't you feel a bit miffed?


3. The lawyers of the Dutch Railroad are not considering a legal claim for damages against the two Muslims... which would really be the long term solution for the problem: they are obviously in Holland because they prefer the better living to their own country, so let them pay for the damages that introducing their own country's habits caused the Dutch society.


Beg your pardon? So foreign customs are illegal, now? I've said it before, and I'll say it again: a society that refuses to open up to outside influences will stagnate. Personally, I like such things as sugar, spices, acupuncture, chess, tea, garlic, coca cola and Chinese food. I'd mention coffee, but I'm not a coffee drinker. But anyway, none of them are good old, traditional Norwegian elements. And all of them have made a significant impact on our culture and heritage. What's Christmas without a Christmas tree and rice porridge? What would any country look like if we didn't embrace new things?

In any case, what sort of precedence would you be setting by persecuting innocent people? What you are suggesting is nothing short of martial law for a certain segment of the population, namely the Muslims. I'd be very interested in seeing how you would present that case, when the two Muslims had done nothing wrong.

[The Avon Lady]

Here's a clue to identifying terrorists: They look like everybody else! They try to avoid obvious things such as wearing religious attire, entering restrooms in groups, looking mean and dangerous etc. Think about it: If you were plotting some foul play, wouldn't you want to be as inconspicuous as possible? Those who flaunt their religion are SO not the ones to worry about.
You can bet your sweet burqa on that (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/05/international/middleeast/05iraq.html)!

[Kissaki]

Here's a clue to identifying terrorists: They look like everybody else! They try to avoid obvious things such as wearing religious attire, entering restrooms in groups, looking mean and dangerous etc. Think about it: If you were plotting some foul play, wouldn't you want to be as inconspicuous as possible? Those who flaunt their religion are SO not the ones to worry about.
You can bet your sweet burqa on that (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/05/international/middleeast/05iraq.html)!

Well, there can be several reasons for that. Some theories suggest:

* chromosomal abnormality
* imbalances in hormones
* problems with early parent-child bonding
* harmful child-rearing practices

;)

(What do you know. The fourth link when I google "transexualism" is Transexuality in Israel. (http://www.geocities.com/ts_il/) It's a small world, indeed. :P )

[Abraham]

I think you are completely missing my point.
I got a bit pizzed off by the enormous consternation and chaos caused by the for us Dutch extremely unusual habit of ritual washing in a train as a preparation for prayers (in the train as well?). The Dutch public is being made aware of terrorist threats since Muslim suicide bomb attacks on public transportation are 'en vogue'. Are the Dutch people who called the police stupid and narrowminded? Are the Arabs, for not understanding local sensitivities...? It's up to you to decide, but I have been raised by parents who always told me to respect the sensitivities of others and their culture when in a foreign environment.

The lawyers of the two innocent Muslims are considering a legal claim for damages against the Dutch Railroad and/or the Dutch police...Perfectly understandable. If you were arrested and carried off in full public view for doing nothing wrong, wouldn't you feel a bit miffed?Whether you can claim damages when arrested as innocents depends on the reason for your arrest.You find a claim perfecrly understandable, I doubt very much whether they have a case, to put it mildly... One of the Muslims later declared that after the arrest he understood that his behaviour had caused some alarm. He should have shown that understanding before...
By the way he also wondered why nobody of the passengers had asked them if they had any bad intentions... Go figure!
The lawyers of the Dutch Railroad are not considering a legal claim for damages against the two Muslims... which would really be the long term solution for the problem: they are obviously in Holland because they prefer the better living to their own country, so let them pay for the damages that introducing their own country's habits caused the Dutch society.Beg your pardon? So foreign customs are illegal, now?You ask if foreign customs are illegal nowadays, when I only - jokingly - suggested that the Dutch Railroad system could claim damages.
Again you are completely missing the point. Nobody here is talking about criminal law, anything "illegal", or not respecting religious freedom. I was - half seriously - suggesting a civil claim for damages. To give you an example: when I leave my backpack with a ticking alarm clock in a bus, metro or train, whether in Amsterdam, New York, Paris or London I am not doing anything illegal. However I might well caused huge delays and damages to the public transportation system and its many passengers. Of course those can claim those damages.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: a society that refuses to open up to outside influences will stagnate.You add the accusation that a society that is not open to outside influences will stagnate. If you mean Holland, your remark proves that you have no knowledge at all about the openness of Dutch society. As a general rule you are right though. Just look at the average Muslim (controlled) society.
Personally, I like such things as sugar... but I'm not a coffee drinker... What's Christmas without a Christmas tree and rice porridge? What would any country look like if we didn't embrace new things?You are defending a point of view that nobody - me the least - is attacking.

Really getting in the mood, you take the next step attacking me, by saying In any case, what sort of precedence would you be setting by persecuting innocent people? What you are suggesting is nothing short of martial law for a certain segment of the population, namely the Muslims.Nobody, me the least, has been talking about persecuting innocent people at all. Your next line is exaggeration beyond comprehension. If my - short lived - irritation for utterly un-Dutch behaviour in public like practicing religious rituals in a train is considered by you as nothing less but discriminatory "martial law" against the Muslim segment of the Dutch population, you utterly lost me...
I think you either need to apologise for making a farce of and lack of respect for my opinion or take a Prozac and calm down...
As you will understand I really have difficulty taking the content of your posting serious.
Neither do you, as your response to The Avon Lady clearly shows...

[Kissaki]

Whether you can claim damages when arrested as innocents depends on the reason for your arrest.You find a claim perfecrly understandable, I doubt very much whether they have a case, to put it mildly... One of the Muslims later declared that after the arrest he understood that his behaviour had caused some alarm. He should have shown that understanding before...


I don't think they have a case, either. But I do understand their desire to take legal action.


You ask if foreign customs are illegal nowadays, when I only - jokingly - suggested that the Dutch Railroad system could claim damages.

You say jokingly now, but it was not apparent in your post. On internet forums it is customary to throw out a smiley or two to show that a comment was made in jest or tongue in cheek. And based on your previous posts, I had every reason to believe you were dead serious.


Again you are completely missing the point. Nobody here is talking about criminal law, anything "illegal", or not respecting religious freedom. I was - half seriously - suggesting a civil claim for damages. To give you an example: when I leave my backpack with a ticking alarm clock in a bus, metro or train, whether in Amsterdam, New York, Paris or London I am not doing anything illegal. However I might well caused huge delays and damages to the public transportation system and its many passengers. Of course those can claim those damages.

Fair point, but applied in this case would be the same as to say, "sorry, but your kind just look so awfully scary when you carry anything that could potentially hold a bomb". There is supposed to be equality for the law, and if a couple of white people had been arrested under similar circumstances, most people would say the police overreacted.


I've said it before, and I'll say it again: a society that refuses to open up to outside influences will stagnate.You add the accusation that a society that is not open to outside influences will stagnate. If you mean Holland, your remark proves that you have no knowledge at all about the openness of Dutch society.[/quote]

I did not mean Holland, or any country in specific. The comment was directed at you, because you advocate shutting the door to foreign impulses which are too different from your own culture.

You are defending a point of view that nobody - me the least - is attacking.


Well, you did say "The point is that certain outdated cultural habits (it has nothing to do with freedom of religion) are not acceptable or not accepted by modern Dutch society". And you also suggested that by wearing their traditional clothings the Muslims were "confronting" the general public with their religion. What they did - or as the case is, wore - is not a confrontation in my book. What if a Maori was show up with his face full of tribal tattoos? Would he be confronting people with his culture? It's not like he can take them off. Similarly, removing all trappings of faith is not an option for many a religious person either. Should they hide their religion as if they were ashamed?

As far as I'm concerned, the problem is that many people haven't been assimilated to these new cultures yet. And yes, it is my opinion that assimilation is not purely the responsibility of the newcomer. As "old-timers" (for lack of a better word), it is our responsibility to realize that prople from foreign cultures are bound to have foreign habits, and we should accept that. They assimilate as much as they need to, but we shouldn't really expect more than that.


Really getting in the mood, you take the next step attacking me, by saying In any case, what sort of precedence would you be setting by persecuting innocent people? What you are suggesting is nothing short of martial law for a certain segment of the population, namely the Muslims.Nobody, me the least, has been talking about persecuting innocent people at all.

You have already forgotten what you wrote, I see. So I'll remind you:

"The lawyers of the Dutch Railroad are not considering a legal claim for damages against the two Muslims... which would really be the long term solution for the problem: they are obviously in Holland because they prefer the better living to their own country, so let them pay for the damages that introducing their own country's habits caused the Dutch society."

Sure, now you say that you were only joking. Or half-joking. But if my reaction was a misunderstanding, it is one for which you are responsible. I still can't see anything in that paragraph that would suggest you were joking.


Your next line is exaggeration beyond comprehension. If my - short lived - irritation for utterly un-Dutch behaviour in public like practicing religious rituals in a train is considered by you as nothing less but discriminatory "martial law" against the Muslim segment of the Dutch population, you utterly lost me...

If you advocate that certain people may be detained for no good reason, that ethnicity is sufficient "probable cause", that is definitely a trait of martial law. You say now - now - that you weren't really serious, but how was I or anyone else to know? And really, if this was a misunderstanding on my part, what are you getting upset about?


I think you either need to apologise for making a farce of and lack of respect for my opinion or take a Prozac and calm down...

I am not the one getting all huffy and puffy here. You said yourself that what you wrote was the product of your "short-lived irritation for utterly un-Dutch behaviour in public", and that's your big mistake. Never post in anger. You have no idea how long I spend on some of these posts because I have to moderate myself. Sometimes I scrap my own post altogether if it serves no other purpose than to vent my feelings.

As for the farce comment... If you think I'm going to apologize for mistakes you're responsible for, you've got another think coming.


As you will understand I really have difficulty taking the content of your posting serious.

Hmmm... You demand that I respect your opinion, but here you admit to not taking me seriously. Tell me, how would you view such a person?


Neither do you, as your response to The Avon Lady clearly shows...

I always enjoy a good and fair fight, and Avon Lady gives me that. Whether I agree with her or not, I like and respect her - if anyone can give me a good run for my money, she's it. And whether you choose to believe me or not, I do respect you as well, as well as every single poster on this forum. This is because no one has done something so outrageous as to cause total loss of respect. However, I do not care much for your temper, and you are in no position to demand an apology when you manage to hurl insults in the very same sentence.

[Abraham]

I wonder whether I should really care to answer you.
You just seem to enjoy creating misunderstandings...
I also enjoy a good and fair fight, but I certainly don't find it with you.
And if you did not see some humor and relativism in my original posting (and in the title I choose), where should I begin?
However I might decide to respond fully and try to solve any misunderstanding.
But if I do so, it will be tomorrow.

[caspofungin]

why can't we all just get along? ;)

[Iceman]

we've had similar arguments before, on other threads. in fact, you've quoted that before, right? for every sura you quote, i can quote one with a different "twist" on the relationship between muslims, jews, and christians.


Can you?...Can you you Really?...I have listened to you and Kissaki for a few weeks now and have asked for exactly that...and yet ...Where are these quotes that counter what Avon Lady is quoting? Until you can provide the specific places where these Extreme views are discounted you guys are Hot Air.
I challenge you to provide it..I beg you...I have the feeling you will only answer again with emptiness.
Please discount this verse Avon Lady quoted that is to be followed by Muslims with another verse from the book.If you can't then plz don't make quotes about things you know nothing about.

[caspofungin]

a. go check the old threads.
b. i'm a muslim, so i'd probably know the views of myself and other muslims
c. or don't believe me, go read the quran yourself.

[Iceman]

a. go check the old threads.
b. i'm a muslim, so i'd probably know the views of myself and other muslims
c. or don't believe me, go read the quran yourself.

Thank you for clearing that up...that response put my questions to rest.When I read a direct quote from your book like Avon posted and I hear 'No" rebuttal I will take that as it is what you believe as gospel yet have not the courage to admit it.Ya can come behead me if you think my death will gain you instant enterance into your heaven.I will never convert to Islam and if death is what is required of you as a muslim to be in accordance to your faith, then my faith says do not be a stumbling block to any man...my head awaits you.Some of you may think what I am saying is hard core but hey...it's not my religion saying to do this I am only trying to help out.

[caspofungin]

how does my response put your questions to rest?

i've quoted and counter-quoted w/ avon lady before. the quotes are on record and on the threads.

despite what you say, i'm not here to convert you. i'm not here to convince you. all i'm here trying to do is present rebuttals to misinformed or one-sided arguments.

I will take that as it is what you believe as gospel yet have not the courage to admit it

what's that meant to mean?

Some of you may think what I am saying is hard core but hey...it's not my religion saying to do this I am only trying to help out.

i don't think its hard core, i think its unclear. i also think you've got your views and will continue to hold them no matter what i say or post. am i wrong?

tell you what, go read the quran yourself When I read a direct quote from your book and make up your own mind. there's actually a bit in there that says you can't force people into believing what they don't want to believe. i state that not as a religious challenge, but just as a simple statement.

I will never convert to Islam

don't convert, i never asked you to.

and if death is what is required of you as a muslim to be in accordance to your faith

it's not. if you knew anything about my faith apart from what you learned on these forums and watching fox news, you'd know that.

then my faith says do not be a stumbling block to any man

and if more people of any faiths actually lived by that rule, the world would be a lot ****ing more peaceful. so go try it.

[caspofungin]

that's right, i am dangerous... ice... man.

[caspofungin]

that's from top gun, just joking, i'm not really dangerous. i'll post quotes tomorrow, iceman, if you'll keep an open mind.

[Abraham]

why can't we all just get along? ;)
Yeah, fair question.
I think it has less to do with our conflicting opinions than with our style of posting...
It is fair to disagree, even disagree completely with eachother.
It is also fair - but touchy - to criticise religions in general terms.
However, it helps a lot to remember all the time how others will react to your postings.
Sometimes we post opinions that necessairely hurt others in their (religious) feelings and convictions. Showing respect and understanding for the other helps a lot to stay on speaking terms.
Also we should give leeway to others to correct themselves and accept that in good faith.
And realise that listening to other opinions can be a learning experience... even without agreeing! I've certainly learned from hearing the opinions of others.
Another trick that helps getting along is as strickt a separation between subjects. Why not fully agree with someone on one subject (and say so!) after criticising him on another? I've had some bad fights with Skybird about several subjects but we both acknowledged support to one another on subjects we agreed upon at the same time...