Anti-dhimmitude from an Australian cardinal: full score

[Skybird]

http://www.sydney.catholic.org.au/Archbishop/Addresses/200627_681.shtml

Applause! I'll buy that man a cigar :lol:

And from the dhimmi-watch-website, this comment on that speech, previously being referred to by the commentator as "one of the clearest, most honest, best-informed statements about Islam that I have ever seen from a contemporary christian prelate":

Predictably, Muslims and dhimmi Leftists in Australia are enraged by Cardinal George Pell's truth-telling address in Florida, and -- again predictably -- labeling the entirely accurate information he presented about Islamic theology and history as a manifestation of his "ignorance" of Islam. But so far he is refusing to back down.

"Pell denies ignorance about Islam," from Australian ABC, with thanks to Sr. Soph:

The Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, Cardinal George Pell, says he is committed to maintaining a positive dialogue with Muslims.
Cardinal Pell has come under fire for comments on Islam he made to a group of Catholic businessmen in the United States earlier this year.

In the speech, Cardinal Pell urged Christians to read the Koran to better understand Islam.

But he said the sacred book repeatedly incited violence and that Islam was not tolerant of other religions.

Rahim Ghauri, from the Federation of Islamic Councils, says Cardinal Pell's comments are disappointing.

"I wish people of his calibre would give some positive statements so the world can come together," he said.

New South Wales Greens MP Lee Rhiannon says Cardinal Pell should resign.

"He is the leading Catholic he should be working for tolerance and respect."

'Open to dialogue'

However, Cardinal Pell has rejected suggestions he is uninformed about Islam.

"Isolated suggestions that I am uninformed on Islam are cliches, smokescreens to distract, to divert attention rather than address basic issues which need to be discussed," he said in a statement.

"Islamic terrorists are not a figment of anyone's imagination and the history of relations with Islam is full of conflict.

"I continue to be completely committed to dialogue with Muslims, to supporting moderate forces on all sides."

Cardinal Pell says people should read the Koran and his article in Quadrant and judge for themselves.

"We need a lot of continuing dialogue, based on truth, history and the current situation," he said.


Yes: read the Qur'an, and have a dialogue based on truth. How simple, how commonsensical, and how refreshing.

We need oh so many more reasonable voices like that that denies to fall into the chorus of pro-Islamic lies just to please some infantile dreamer's illusions from the eurocratic and political left and green spectrum.

[mapuc]

I think it's about time, that we establish an international forum. A forum that principally is about islam and the holy Quran

I'm debating with lots of people in Denmark and Sweden and they are also so tired of the muslim behavior in their country

Regards
Markus

[TteFAboB]

George Pell for Pope! :up:

[Bertgang]

George Pell should be the best candidate to Papacy for Al Quaeda; an excellent reason to call an Holy War against christian crusaders.

He selected very well some really unpleasant statements of Quran, but I am really suspicious about each word reported out of his general context; an abused way to hide the real meaning of everything (italian politicians are masters in that).

To be honest, the Bible too shows some bloody chapters - Iceman could quote something about that better than me - but christians know that the whole message is totally different.

[Skybird]

Honestly, my impression was and is that the Koran is overflowing with calls for violence against all that resist Islam. While the old testament certainly is a very archaic piece of work, it nevertheless is not the basic principle on which Jesus' message is founded on, or can be understood. In my understanding you cannot only follow the teachings of Jesus and ignore the old testament, in my undersatanding you even MUST ignore the old testament if you want to follow the teachings of Jesus. In that he is not different from buddha, like they have so many other similiarities as well. I think the Koran is just a cheap plagiate, prdouced by an obessed mind with high-fyling plans and moinum,ental ambitions for power and control, that abused and self-created "religion" to cover it's own material ambitions and craving for privileges. It calls Christians and Jews forgers of holy scriptures, but is lacking any authenticity itself. And it demands the unconditional surrender, or the overcoming by violance, of anything that is not Islam. Submit, or die. That is the message of Islam in it's most essential version. North Africa, Spain, Sicily, the middle East, the Balcans: it has laways acted like this: submit, or die.

BTW, it is not happening often that in the name of Chrstianity someone starts to blow up busses or blazes bombs on market places, because he does not like something that has happened or not happened. But that this not really rare in case of Islam, isn't it. Jesus never cemanded war and murder, dislacement and torutre of those who did not accept his message. Muhammad did. Both do not compare. the first was a wise man. The latter was a bandit, warmonger and gang-leader. the first talked about winning true freedom. The latter designed the form of Islamic practice so that man's all life is centered around him - Muhammad. He leaves people no rest and no free time to even start thinking about the chance if their could be something more than just worshipping Islam. Very efficient way to prevent rebellions: keep them busy.

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1051
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1053

And while we are at it: A little story from Germany:

http://www.berlinonline.de/berliner-zeitung/archiv/.bin/dump.fcgi/2006/0410/politik/0076/index.html

"In Bochum feierten gestern erstmals Muslime und evangelische Christen gemeinsam den Geburtstag des Propheten Mohammed. Die Feier, die von sieben Moscheengemeinden des türkischen Dachverbandes DITIB organisiert wurde, fand in einer evangelischen Kirche statt. Das klingt irgendwie versöhnlich, also gut. Aber welchen Sinn sollte es haben?

Gestern war Palmsonntag, der Tag, an dem Christen normalerweise den Beginn der Osterwoche begehen. Superintendent Fred Sobiech versuchte in seiner Ansprache vergebens, die beiden Ereignisse notdürftig miteinander zu verbinden: "Heute erinnern wir an die Geburt und das Leben Mohammeds, und mit dem heutigen Tage beginnt zugleich die Woche, die uns Christen zum Karfreitag führen wird, dem Tag an dem Jesus von Nazareth gekreuzigt wurde." Was das eine mit dem anderen zu tun haben sollte, war damit zwar nicht erklärt, aber das war auch nicht zu erwarten."

Der Vorgang erinnert an die Tagung des Industrieverbands im Palast der Republik. Die aber war wenigstens ehrlich ausgeschildert - als Landnahme. "

[Konovalov]

Honestly, my impression was and is that the Koran is overflowing with calls for violence against all that resist Islam.

This from a guy who has admitted to not reading it let alone studying it, and who makes mention that he has a whole bookshelf measuring 1m wide on the topic of Islam. Not to mention when I have attempted to explain the meaning of certain holy texts of my faith you say that you don't want to get into the theology. As one who has been Muslim for a long time, who reads from the Holy Quran every week, who practises my faith every day, who attends study sessions every month, I scratch my head at times and ask myself, did Skybird really get his info on Islam from the back of a cornflakes packet? And if you are offended by that then I am just applying the same standard you do. Making comments about me that I am under some spell in your posts as an explanation as to how could I convert to Islam and your laughable rationalisation that actually I am not a Muslim at all. I would rather prefer that you stop your pontificating about me altogether.

[Skybird]

Your demand that I do not bring you personally into play is fair enough. Where I did, I apologize for that. At lewast I did not in an aggressive tone towards you personally.

Where you claim you get deep knowledge on life and meaning (if that is what you meant) by reading the Quran, I leave you alone on that. Your practicing leaves me completely unimpressed, like I am not impressed by Tibetan buddhists spending all their life to approach a far away temple on knees and doing some hundred thousands bows towards it or some Buddhist idol. That is no living spirituality, that is frozen cult only. I came to the conclusion that the Quran is designed to make people stop looking for answers outside the Quran, so what you would call a virtue, is a very severe handicap in my eyes. It is the reason why historically Isdlamic socieites are lacking so much behind and are suffering from a standstill since many centuries.

The extreme intolerance and hostility of Islam towards anything that is not itself is historical fact, both in history and present. What you believe to see good and wonderful in it is your personal thing only. What historical analysis, and statistcs are able to proove beyond belief and hear-say, is something very different. You once answered a question of mine (why you converted) that you dealt a lot with the studying of political violaqnce and because of that converted to Islam. My first thought to that was "this guy is queer". Because Islam's ideology is a prime example for political violance and terror.

And yes, I do claim to have a general overview over the Koran when having red maybe one third of it (and it was oh so repetitive), and having red several in-depth academical analysis about it, and Hadith as well. At some point I had to realize that I could not gain any more understanding by continue to limit myself to reading the koran alone. One needs to go beyond it, if one wants to see it in a total picture. Sticking to it means limitations only. You can't see your house if you don't leave the room.

Can't help it, but we stand on different sides. You defend what I fight against. But your presence will not make me stop critizising and attacking it. Because it is my home and my country and my culture at stake, not the one that you claim to have choosen for yourself. I also sometimes wonder if you really were aware of the dimension of the step you have taken. Maybe there will come a time when you see yourself unable to try to be a travellewr between both worlds any longer. OK, last time that I personally adressed you.

Cornflakes... brrr... hate that stuff. Fresh corn tastes so much better and is so much more fun to bite than this factory stuff. :lol:

[Konovalov]

Your demand that I do not bring you personally into play is fair enough. Where I did, I apologize for that. At lewast I did not in an aggressive tone towards you personally.

I didn't take it as an aggressive tone. Rather just simply a presumptious one. In any case apology accepted.

Where you claim you get deep knowledge on life and meaning (if that is what you meant) by reading the Quran, I leave you alone on that. Your practicing leaves me completely unimpressed, like I am not impressed by Tibetan buddhists spending all their life to approach a far away temple on knees and doing some hundred thousands bows towards it or some Buddhist idol. That is no living spirituality, that is frozen cult only.

You took practising just a little too literally there. Salah (prayer) can be viewed as many things. It can be a time for deeply spiritual reflection and/or a timeout from the stresses of day to day life. What you disdainfully refer to is just the mere physical on the surface. It is the spiritual side within ones head and heart that can't be seen or judged by others.

I came to the conclusion that the Quran is designed to make people stop looking for answers outside the Quran, so what you would call a virtue, is a very severe handicap in my eyes. It is the reason why historically Isdlamic socieites are lacking so much behind and are suffering from a standstill since many centuries.

If I applied your rule here to when Europe was in the Dark Ages and Islamic societies were prospering with technological developments it doesn't add up. Certainly the Qu'ran wasn't a handicap to Muslim inventors and scientists at that time. To say that the Holy Qu'ran is the reason for Islamic societies lacking behind/standstill is contrary to the historial evidence and ignoring things such as globalisation, colonialism, the renaissance/reformation period and so forth.

You once answered a question of mine (why you converted) that you dealt a lot with the studying of political violaqnce and because of that converted to Islam. My first thought to that was "this guy is queer". Because Islam's ideology is a prime example for political violance and terror.

There you go again. You raise a PM here. I thought PM's were as by its name meant to be private. I know that you have had a problem with this in the past between Abraham and maybe someone else also. But to address what you said. You have miss-quoted and miss-characterized what I said back then in that now not so private PM. I said that my exposure to Islam came via my study of political violence where one study unit was on religiously inspired/motivated terrorism. From this I took it upon myself to find out more about Islam because my knowledge of this faith was very poor. It was after almost a year of personal research that I decided that the faith of Islam was for me. It's almost now as if you try to imply that I converted because I was impressed with the violence linked to Islam. I hope not because that is unequivocal BS with a capital B and a capital S.

And yes, I do claim to have a general overview over the Koran when having red maybe one third of it (and it was oh so repetitive), and having red several in-depth academical analysis about it, and Hadith as well.

Can you please advise me as to which translation/copy of the Qu'ran that you own/refer to?

At some point I had to realize that I could not gain any more understanding by continue to limit myself to reading the koran alone. One needs to go beyond it, if one wants to see it in a total picture. Sticking to it means limitations only. You can't see your house if you don't leave the room.

I think I have met your requirements. I have analaysed Islam as a non-Muslim and as a Muslim. Hence I have seen my house from outside my room.

Can't help it, but we stand on different sides. You defend what I fight against.

No need to state the obvious. :)

But your presence will not make me stop critizising and attacking it. Because it is my home and my country and my culture at stake, not the one that you claim to have choosen for yourself.

I think the evidence on this forum in your almost daily posting of this topic/subject matter and the fact that I am still here reading your posts, addressing your points when time permits, and listening to your arguments highlights that I am tolerant of your views and your right to air them. You don't see me on this forum shouting down other people or demanding forum members being silenced most importantly including yourself. I haven't asked you to desist and I certainly would hope that my mere presence here doesn't intimidate you. Quite frankly it all sounds just bloody silly. Really I can't see any need or justification for you to say what you did here.

I also sometimes wonder if you really were aware of the dimension of the step you have taken. Maybe there will come a time when you see yourself unable to try to be a travellewr between both worlds any longer. OK, last time that I personally adressed you.

My friends would tell you that I am always cautious and think things thru. My wife makes fun of me for the fact that I am the kind of guy who actually reads all the fine print be it a legal document, finance, or whatever it may be. I really shouldn't have to qualify how worldly, level headed, or thought driven I am. Perhaps it's best not to question peoples deeply personal decisions and judgement here if you don't know them that well, unlike for example family or close/lifelong friends who are in a better position to raise such questions.

Cornflakes... brrr... hate that stuff. Fresh corn tastes so much better and is so much more fun to bite than this factory stuff. :lol:

Well I partly agree here. :D I like both. The only downside to fresh corn on the cobb has to be when it gets stuck in between your teeth. Damn I hate that. :damn:

[Skybird]

If I applied your rule here to when Europe was in the Dark Ages and Islamic societies were prospering with technological developments it doesn't add up. Certainly the Qu'ran wasn't a handicap to Muslim inventors and scientists at that time. To say that the Holy Qu'ran is the reason for Islamic societies lacking behind/standstill is contrary to the historial evidence and ignoring things such as globalisation, colonialism, the renaissance/reformation period and so forth.

Islam did take benefit of that many basic principles of mathematics and astronomy - had been developed in times before muhammad. Once Islam had arrived, sciences had been minimized to those fields that are unable to raise traditions of thinking schools that could develope rivalling philosophical systems, ideas, or that would be able to challenge the claim if Islam that the Quran is and must be the source of all insight and enlightenment. True philosophical diversity never developed in Islam,there were attempts - and the people behind them most often died in prison cells, or by force, or had to hide their convition in sometimes both clever and fun ny ways - but many of them after a long enough time submitted to the othodoxy again. Sahaladin, this icon of an idealized noble Islam, has been responsible for executing some of the most promising people and some of the brigtest minds that ever showed up during Islams history. That way, Islamic sciences were anti-philosophical, anti-sociological, anti-political, everything that could change Islam'S final rule on how people should live and how they should believe (whereas the chruch concentrates on WHAT people should believe) was forbidden, and still is so. the developement of more instrumental, hard physical sciences was allowe to be carried on, because architects and surgeons hardly could affect the social system and the religious dogma - they were no threat. Nevertheless, sciences in general did not had the freedom they need to come to full blossoming. Europe had that phases, and as a result there can be little doubt, that technologically, industrially, in terms of humanitarian legal systems and humanistic philosophy, with special regard towards the separation of church and state, reached a state that finally was superior to that of islamic societies. Islamic societies today are still very much like they were in the medieval, and what progress there has been, most of the time had been bought or imported. having seen the living conditions and the massive spread of bribary in several such countries (often thinking of it as a time travel, I can have no doubt that our civilization has reached a superior level. Else why shoulöd they want to come to our countries and live here? you say Islam does not seek world dominance and does not invade other cultures, and you say there is no btter living in our places, and culturally we are no better, too. so why do they come here? at least one of these reason you deny must be true.



There you go again. You raise a PM here. I thought PM's were as by its name meant to be private. I know that you have had a problem with this in the past between Abraham and maybe someone else also. But to address what you said. You have miss-quoted and miss-characterized what I said back then in that now not so private PM. I said that my exposure to Islam came via my study of political violence where one study unit was on religiously inspired/motivated terrorism. From this I took it upon myself to find out more about Islam because my knowledge of this faith was very poor. It was after almost a year of personal research that I decided that the faith of Islam was for me. It's almost now as if you try to imply that I converted because I was impressed with the violence linked to Islam. I hope not because that is unequivocal BS with a capital B and a capital S.

No, it was not such a linking I attempted. I was stunned that someone can study political violance - and then convert to something that he probably assume to be a cure or defender against that - but that is a major user and propagater of political violance himself. As I understood you, I was surprised that you converted to something and DID NOT SEE how very much politically vioant this thing you converted to is itself. So, I did not mean you sympathize with this kind of violence (then I would not deal with you that much at all), but that you oversee it.
On the PM thing, we had talked about this in public before, and thus I did not consider it to be that much a PM any longer. I aloso did not go beyond this detail that already was oublic now. Anyway, you are irritated by that, so again, my apology. My problem with Abraham one year ago has been for VERY different reasons. It does not compare

Can you please advise me as to which translation/copy of the Qu'ran that you own/refer to?

The one I own in writing is by Hazrat Mirza Tahirm Ahmad, Germany, 1993. I used excerpt-copies of selected chapters of interest, that literature I currently was reding was dealing with, and in recent years I also used, online sites as well (using the version at islam.de). I red the printed one from start to end, but with interruptions. I mean I did not read the complete first third, and then stopped. Roughly the third I read is spread around all suras. I fast-skimmed over a good ammount of the rest that I did not read in-depth. - I consider the books I red about the Quran to be far more important for me. The Quran did not gave me anything more than the old testament (that I also only "hopp-readed"). Like that Australian bishop, I used a green and an orange pencil to mark text passages of positive/tolerant/peaceful/beautiful content, and passages of negative/violant/intolerant/inhuman content. I must say that the orange colour - by far - dominates when skimming the pages now.

[Konovalov]

Can you please advise me as to which translation/copy of the Qu'ran that you own/refer to?

The one I own in writing is by Hazrat Mirza Tahirm Ahmad, Germany, 1993. I used excerpt-copies of selected chapters of interest, that literature I currently was reding was dealing with, and in recent years I also used, online sites as well (using the version at islam.de). I red the printed one from start to end, but with interruptions. I mean I did not read the complete first third, and then stopped. Roughly the third I read is spread around all suras. I fast-skimmed over a good ammount of the rest that I did not read in-depth. - I consider the books I red about the Quran to be far more important for me. The Quran did not gave me anything more than the old testament (that I also only "hopp-readed"). Like that Australian bishop, I used a green and an orange pencil to mark text passages of positive/tolerant/peaceful/beautiful content, and passages of negative/violant/intolerant/inhuman content. I must say that the orange colour - by far - dominates when skimming the pages now.

Thanks for your answer.

[TLAM Strike]

I came to the conclusion that the Quran is designed to make people stop looking for answers outside the Quran, so what you would call a virtue, is a very severe handicap in my eyes. It is the reason why historically Isdlamic socieites are lacking so much behind and are suffering from a standstill since many centuries.

If I applied your rule here to when Europe was in the Dark Ages and Islamic societies were prospering with technological developments it doesn't add up. Certainly the Qu'ran wasn't a handicap to Muslim inventors and scientists at that time. To say that the Holy Qu'ran is the reason for Islamic societies lacking behind/standstill is contrary to the historial evidence and ignoring things such as globalisation, colonialism, the renaissance/reformation period and so forth.

Lets see... devloped in Europe in the Middle Ages:
Artesian Wells, Rotary Grindstones, Hops (for beer... although liquor is ironically an Islamic invention IIRC), Horizontal Loom, Mirrors, Rat Trap, Liquid Soap, Spectacles, Tidal Mills, Wheelbarrow, Windmills...

[Konovalov]

I came to the conclusion that the Quran is designed to make people stop looking for answers outside the Quran, so what you would call a virtue, is a very severe handicap in my eyes. It is the reason why historically Isdlamic socieites are lacking so much behind and are suffering from a standstill since many centuries.

If I applied your rule here to when Europe was in the Dark Ages and Islamic societies were prospering with technological developments it doesn't add up. Certainly the Qu'ran wasn't a handicap to Muslim inventors and scientists at that time. To say that the Holy Qu'ran is the reason for Islamic societies lacking behind/standstill is contrary to the historial evidence and ignoring things such as globalisation, colonialism, the renaissance/reformation period and so forth.

Lets see... devloped in Europe in the Middle Ages:
Artesian Wells, Rotary Grindstones, Hops (for beer... although liquor is ironically an Islamic invention IIRC), Horizontal Loom, Mirrors, Rat Trap, Liquid Soap, Spectacles, Tidal Mills, Wheelbarrow, Windmills...

It wasn't meant to be a pee pee contest. All societies have made tremendous scientific ad engineering contributions to the world in which we live.

[Skybird]

Islam should not claim equality where it is no equal at all. However, the fruits other socieites have suffered and fought for - it wants to take benefit of without having added it's share of effort to the previous cause to go there. Historically, no matter if looking at Northafrica, to Spain, the Balkans, the middle East, India, it only consumed the conquested territories, and brought them down economically. when they had been worn out, the Islmic communties there stagnated. They have not learned to creatively raise civilizational developement themselves. It is prohibited in their ideology. It is even not needed, for Islam thinks of itself to be the end of history, the final and best climax there can be, and after which nothing else can come. It does not know our understanding of historical developement, or the cyclic historical concepts in Asian philosophy. Islam is the finsihing touch, the ending point, the best of all worlds. no need to developee any futher. It even is impossible.

That is also the reason why the often heared argument that the violant quotes from the Quran must be seen in historical context is complete nonsens, and self-contradictory. Quran as the revelation of a divine will that always has been, always is, and always will be there, never-changing, non-transitory and eternal, makes all it's claims and statements completely independent from any situational, time-dependant historical contexts. No matter if the darkest medieval, or the modern present - the same rules apply,always, without difference. It is put in stone, frozen in time, doomed to be unable to change and develope.

This is no twisted provocation by me. This is logical coclusion on the basis of Islam's claim how it sees and understands the Quran, and sees itself. It is independent from historical context, from a muslim perspective.
This is what makes it so ectremely diofficult for Islmaic societies to change, to develope, to adopt to an ever-changing world. They always go back to imitating the example of the socalled Medina-model, and Muhammad. It's like an unbrakable psychoanalytical fixation. You can demand as much as you want that they should change. You can tell them, teach them, show them - they will take what you invest, consume it for staying like they are, and when the input ends, they stagnate oin the very same level again. In principle it has been like this since the 10th century or so, and evemn during the first wave on conquests. A complete lack of inner dynamic, whereas the West wnt thorugh many chnages, crisis, developement and phases that finally led it to the renaissance and the enlightenment (for which Islam claims credits it does not deserve!!!) that enabled it to build the basis of modern science and technology, philosophical diversity, the separation of politics and religions.