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/im..._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

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.

OMG is that realy you skybird ?

yay he is back :D

Maybe he auctioned off his SubSim account password on Ebay. :o

Back then I wrote:
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.

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.

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.

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!
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?
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.
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:

Re: Are we in or heading for a Clash of Civilizations?
 

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?


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.


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.

Re: Are we in or heading for a Clash of Civilizations?
 

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

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.

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.

Re: Are we in or heading for a Clash of Civilizations?
 

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.
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...

Re: Are we in or heading for a Clash of Civilizations?
 

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

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.

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.

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

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.

Re: Are we in or heading for a Clash of Civilizations?
 

[quote="Kissaki"]OK, I confused you with someone else.


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.

@skybird

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.

Re: Are we in or heading for a Clash of Civilizations?
 

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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.