NationStates Jolt Archive

A few commentaries passed my way today, and I was wondering if you saw them and what you thought...

From ALI AL-AHMED, director of the Saudi Institute in Washington;
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/?id=110006712

From some "typical" conservative pundits: (warning, inflamatory headlines but interesting articles)
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/brentbozell/bb20050520.shtml
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/jeffjacoby/jj20050520.shtml
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/monacharen/mc20050520.shtml

Meh ...

A few points I'd like to make, since my name's in the title and all ...

1] Most Muslims really couldn't care less what the Saudi government thinks. Governments are impermanent and imperfect and, thus, useless to the cosmos.

2] Newsweek never actually retracted the Qur'an flushing incident. However, if it did happen, I am offended and appalled. Not because a Qur'an was flushed, but because it means those soldiers were seeking to offend *ALL* Muslims, not just their prisoners, and were too ignorant to not know otherwise. When I was in the Army, before we went to the Middle East, we were given training in how to behave. These soldiers need that same training.

3] Christians don't mind if you make fun of them. Neither do Muslims. The vast majority of us have a sense of humor. Who cares what the stick up the ass hardliners do? We certainly don't ... why should you?

4] Who cares what fatwah gets issued? *I* am qualified to issue a fatwah ... that doesn't mean anyone has to listen to it. Only op/ed writers and Christian zealots actually pay attention to fatwahs.

5] Townhall.com is full of hacks and partisan morons. Don't use it as a source for anything worthwhile. May as well use michaelmoore.com.

Guess that's it.

BTW, if you want to read the article but not put your email on a list just make up an email address. They don't try to confirm it, just send you right to the article.

Dude, you should totally start issuing fatwahs like "pudding is officially delicious under Islam" or something and try to get them published.

Dude, you should totally start issuing fatwahs like "pudding is officially delicious under Islam" or something and try to get them published.

ROFL! Now that would rock. I think I will.

Dude, you should totally start issuing fatwahs like "pudding is officially delicious under Islam" or something and try to get them published.
Mmmm... chocolate pudding.

ROFL! Now that would rock. I think I will.

If i may ask, what makes you (or somebody in general) be qualified to issue one of those fatwahs?

If i may ask, what makes you (or somebody in general) be qualified to issue one of those fatwahs?

Now that there's no Caliph, any Muslim man educated in Qur'an can issue a fatwah.

Now that there's no Caliph, any Muslim man educated in Qur'an can issue a fatwah.

I see. I'm assuming that leaves you in a favourable position then. :)

BTW, if you want to read the article but not put your email on a list just make up an email address. They don't try to confirm it, just send you right to the article.

This works great for avoiding registration, I use it all the time:

http://www.bugmenot.com/

I see. I'm assuming that leaves you in a favourable position then. :)

Yep and in the name of Allah, most Gracious, most Merciful, I hereby declare pudding to be delicious.

This works great for avoiding registration, I use it all the time:

http://www.bugmenot.com/
*gasp*

That is the most beautiful website I have ever seen. *hugs website*

*gasp*

That is the most beautiful website I have ever seen. *hugs website*


Awwww ... *kicks dirt* ... I want hugs ...

Awwww ... *kicks dirt* ... I want hugs ...
*hugs*

*hugs*

Hooray! I win! :D

Meh ...

A few points I'd like to make, since my name's in the title and all ...
's why I asked....
1] Most Muslims really couldn't care less what the Saudi government thinks. Governments are impermanent and imperfect and, thus, useless to the cosmos. Except to the extent that they (and the wahabis) funnel millions $$ into Mosques & education centers. To an awful lot of people, $$ = Moral Authority. Also, as mentioned, the Saudi Embassy and other Saudi organizations in Washington have distributed hundreds of thousands of Qurans and many more Muslim books, some that have libeled Christians, Jews and others as pigs and monkeys. In Saudi school curricula, Jews and Christians are considered deviants and eternal enemies. That is why "most Muslims" should care.

2] Newsweek never actually retracted the Qur'an flushing incident. However, if it did happen, I am offended and appalled. Not because a Qur'an was flushed, but because it means those soldiers were seeking to offend *ALL* Muslims, not just their prisoners, and were too ignorant to not know otherwise. When I was in the Army, before we went to the Middle East, we were given training in how to behave. These soldiers need that same training. I agree about the training, but the point of the article(s) is for all of the intentional offenses promulgated against various religions in recent years, it has only been the (3rd world) Muslim community that has rioted - and claimed causality. I am curious though how someone can both "seek(ing) to offend *ALL* Muslims" (active verb) while simultaneously be "too ignorant to not know otherwise". You can't both be actively involved in an enterprise an be ignorant of it.

3] Christians don't mind if you make fun of them. Neither do Muslims. The vast majority of us have a sense of humor. Who cares what the stick up the ass hardliners do? We certainly don't ... why should you? Because the "stick-up-the-ass hardliners" like to blow people up. The incidents mentioned were not intended as humor. Some, like "Piss Christ" were intended as "art". My question/problem is one of degrees. There was Christian outcry over "Piss Christ" (a widly documented public "event") but no rioting - even in 3rd world countries. The Newsweek story is apocraphal - it may or may not be true, yet there was widespread rioting. Was the "Flush" (if it occured) an appaling disrespect of Islam, yes, but so were the incidents mentioned in the article(s) towards Judiasim, Christianity and Buddhisim.

4] Who cares what fatwah gets issued? *I* am qualified to issue a fatwah ... that doesn't mean anyone has to listen to it. Only op/ed writers and Christian zealots actually pay attention to fatwahs.Aparantly there are enough crazies out there who DO listen to fatwas - especially ones issued by high ranking clerics, that the "targets" of those fatwas go into hiding, get 24hour protection... or get killed. People tend to listen to their preachers and ignore them at their peril. Just look at the recent incident where a preacher "excommunicated" members for not repenting for voting Democrat. If a Fatwa is picked up by a charismatic Imam, then some of his followers will listen. If they didn't, we wouldn't have "suicide bombers".

5] Townhall.com is full of hacks and partisan morons. Don't use it as a source for anything worthwhile. May as well use michaelmoore.com. Yes, TownHall is full of Hacks. I don't deny that at all and even alluded to it in my post, nor was I using obvious punditry as a "source". But the incidents they cite in those articles are well documented and witnessed, and rhetoric aside, the questions they ask are valid. Michael Moore ask(s)ed some valid questions too. In both cases the problem isn't necessairly the question, it's the preconcieved answer. I'm not interested in their preconcieved answers, just the questions themselves - ones that can only be answered by people with a connection to the incident. In this case, the connection is the (physical) Quran and thereby Islam.

From a theological standpoint I do not understand how the "desecration" of a thing can result in violence. Even if we admit that each individual printed Quran is the physical manifestation of the Word of Allah, the individual Qurans are not worthy of veneration, as that is restricted to Allah himself. At least the Catholics (and Greek/Russian Orthodox) include in their doctrine the possibility of Veneration of Not-God, but to my understanding, Islam does not. Given the above, it would seem more likely that 3rd world Catholics or Orthodox Christians should have rioted at one or more of the blatant "desecrations" of their Venerable Icons than would a Muslim - since Muslims can't venerate Not-God.

What (or who) then is responsible for putting many Muslims in such a position of semi-idolatry as to be so concerned with the "desecration" of a single printed copy of the Quran? (and how can this be rectified?)

(Here's my preconcieved answers, your answers may vary... ;) )
The Saudis/Wahabisim have an undue influence on Global Islam. That needs to be curtailed.
More Free Muslims need to be visible in their stance against Islamic-justified terrorisim. That there were less than 100 people who attended the Free Muslims Against Terrorisim (http://www.freemuslims.org/) march in DC is truly sad. Fortunately, FMAT is willing to continue to do the heavy lifting, but why should they? What is holding American Muslims back? CAIR treats FMAT like dirt and actively opposes them (see telephone transcript below) Why?

TH: Greetings, Mr. Hooper. It’s Thomas Haidon from FMAT calling. Asalamu aleykum.
IH: Wa leykum salam.
TH: I am calling with respect to our rally on 14 May 2005. I spoke with your colleague Rabiah Ahmed.
IH: Yes. Thank you. I though FMAT received our official response quite some time ago.
TH: Actually we have not. But we would like CAIR to participate in a stand of unity.
IH: Let’s be honest. Our organisations are diametrically opposed. The leadership of this organisation does not believe that FMAT represents the interests of the American Muslim community. We believe that CAIR does, and our organisation has spoken loudly and clearly against terrorism. We are not sure what this rally would accomplish.
TH: This rally is more than a rally against terrorism. It is a rally against jihad and the tradition of violence that aspects of Islam has fomented. We must speak openly and frankly about these issues. Are you ready to stand with us?
IH: Thank you very much, Thomas. FMAT has received our response. Asalamu aleykum and goodbye.
TH: Wa leykum salam.

If CAIR speaks so "loudly & clearly" against terrorisim, why is it only a low-level link on their website (http://www.cair-net.org/)? Perhaps CAIR does a fine job of being the NAACP of American Muslims, but it is hardly an organization that dedicates itself to fighting radicalisim/terrorism within Islam. (Sorry, Ibrahim Hooper just pushes all of my buttons...)

Except to the extent that they (and the wahabis) funnel millions $$ into Mosques & education centers. To an awful lot of people, $$ = Moral Authority.

Anyone who thinks $$ = Moral Authority is not Muslim. Allah is the only Moral Authority. I don't know what they teach in Saudi schools. I've never been to one.

Because the "stick-up-the-ass hardliners" like to blow people up.

Well, they blow themselves up too. Eventually, they'll die out.

As for FMAT, they got it wrong too. Jihad is a central tenet to Islam. Without jihad there is no Islam. When you seek to abolish jihad, you're seeking to abolish Islam.

Jihad means "struggle", not "holy war". A person who tries to quit smoking or drinking is in jihad. A person who strives to give more to charity is in jihad.

Jihad is essential.

Now that there's no Caliph, any Muslim man educated in Qur'an can issue a fatwah.

That is unbelieveably awesome. Islam is officially 1.348 times more awesome now that I know that.

Anyone who thinks $$ = Moral Authority is not Muslim. Allah is the only Moral Authority. I don't know what they teach in Saudi schools. I've never been to one. Maybe you should find out.
Well, they blow themselves up too. Eventually, they'll die out.Not so long as there are radical preachers and willing believers. When families bring up their children hoping to become "mayrters" there's a problem.
For example: Flames of hate
By Luke David, Evening Standard

Muslim protesters today called for the bombing of New York in a demonstration outside the US embassy in London.

There were threats of "another 9/11" from militants angry at reports of the desecration of the Koran by US troops in Iraq.

Some among the crowd burned an effigy of Tony Blair on a crucifix and then set fire to a Union flag and a Stars and Stripes.

Led by a man on a megaphone, they chanted, "USA watch your back, Osama is coming back" and "Kill, kill USA, kill, kill George Bush". A small detail of police watched as they shouted: "Bomb, bomb New York" and "George Bush, you will pay, with your blood, with your head."

Demonstrators in Grosvenor Square, some with their faces covered with scarves, waved placards which included the message: "Desecrate today and see another 9/11 tomorrow."

The protest was organised by groups including the Muslim Council for Britain and the Muslim Parliamentary Association of the UK. Their protest follows fury in the Islamic world over the claims in a Newsweek magazine that US soldiers at Guantanamo Bay had abused the Koran.

The magazine later withdrew the article and apologised but not before it triggered riots in Afghanistan in which 17 people died and 100 people were injured.

Former Guantanamo Bay detainee Martin Mubanga told the crowd he had seen a copy of the Koran "desecrated" during his time at Camp Delta.

He said: "This was one of the methods they used, throwing the Koran, my Koran, on the floor in my cell."

One of the protesters called for the release of radical Muslim cleric Abu Hamza. He shouted: "Your so-called democracy will fall under the sword of Allah. The day of judgment is coming."

The demonstration coincided with protests across the world. On the West Bank 2,500 Palestinians streamed out of mosques shouting "Death to America". In Calcutta, India, protesters burned, spat and urinated on the US flag. And in Somalia thousands chanted anti-US slogans.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Find this story at http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/18759971?version=1
©2005 Associated New Media Does this sound like a rational display of disgust for an alleged event? Or does it sound like somthing manufactured by exremists to gain new extremists willing to blow themselves up for the Quran ('cause they're certainly not doing it for Allah.)


As for FMAT, they got it wrong too. Jihad is a central tenet to Islam. Without jihad there is no Islam. When you seek to abolish jihad, you're seeking to abolish Islam. Jihad means "struggle", not "holy war". A person who tries to quit smoking or drinking is in jihad. A person who strives to give more to charity is in jihad. Jihad is essential. Taqiyya. There are different types of jihaad. The terrorists themselves use the term jihaad. That is the type FMAT is rallying against. Please look at their website before supposing their entire agenda from one phone conversation.

What about the points in the article(s) or my theology question?

Maybe you should find out.

No thanks. Though if you think that's what's being taught, maybe you should find out for yourself. Don't take other people's word for things. People lie. A lot.

Not so long as there are radical preachers and willing believers. When families bring up their children hoping to become "mayrters" there's a problem.

Meh. Nothing wrong with wanting to die for Allah. Blowing up the innocent, however, is a sure ticket to Hell.

What about the points in the article(s) or my theology question?

Oh I can't be bothered to go read a website and get into a lengthy theological discussion on why people I don't even know do things. I mean ... it's like me asking you why Jerry Falwell does what he does. You probably don't know and probably don't care.

If some jackass wants to go all nutty over the desecration of a book, so be it. I find it silly, but who am I to judge?

<snip>If some jackass wants to go all nutty over the desecration of a book, so be it. I find it silly, but who am I to judge?And that is precisely why Good Islam is having a bad time PR wise. Because people like you won't "Judge" the vile actions of others who use a supposedly shared Religion as an excuse.

I've helped drive Neo Nazi's into bankruptcy in part because they tried to base their antics on Religion and claim they were "Real Christians". I (a Deist), and most Christians damn sure Judged them. What's wrong with Muslims doing the same?

And that is precisely why Good Islam is having a bad time PR wise. Because people like you won't "Judge" the vile actions of others who use a supposedly shared Religion as an excuse.

I've helped drive Neo Nazi's into bankruptcy in part because they tried to base their antics on Religion and claim they were "Real Christians". I (a Deist), and most Christians damn sure Judged them. What's wrong with Muslims doing the same?


Because we're taught - by the same guy, incidently - *not* to judge. No matter what. People can claim whatever they like. Allah will deal with them.

We're really not interested in PR, by the way. I don't feel the need to justify myself in any way to any human.

We're really not interested in PR, by the way. I don't feel the need to justify myself in any way to any human.

Then why do you post so often in defense of the religion you converted to?

Because we're taught - by the same guy, incidently - *not* to judge. No matter what. People can claim whatever they like. Allah will deal with them.

.

Then you must have been taught poorly. Because in this thread and others you often judge Americans, pro Iraq war supporters, Republicans, conservatives, people who use guns, and generally anyone who doesnt believe as you do.

Then why do you post so often in defense of the religion you converted to?

To stop the spreading of misinformation or outright lies. Not really a PR move or a justification, just making sure the information is proper.

Then you must have been taught poorly. Because in this thread and others you often judge Americans, pro Iraq war supporters, Republicans, conservatives, people who use guns, and generally anyone who doesnt believe as you do.

Judge them? Not really. Offering an opinion when asked is not a judgement call.

Because we're taught - by the same guy, incidently - *not* to judge.That is a really poor misreading of that passage, and it conflicts with much else Jesus said. He also said, "go and sin no more"... but I guess that's pretty easy to do after you've blown yourself up.

No matter what. People can claim whatever they like. Allah will deal with them.Frankly, Allah hasn't been doing too good a job lately in keeping Fanatic Followerd from killing innocents.

We're really not interested in PR, by the way. I don't feel the need to justify myself in any way to any human.
Which is why Islam has been devolving from a "Religion of Peace" to one of Violent Lunatics. I would think you would be trying to find any way possible to keep that from happening - including PR.

That is a really poor misreading of that passage, and it conflicts with much else Jesus said. He also said, "go and sin no more"... but I guess that's pretty easy to do after you've blown yourself up.

No conflict at all, actually, but suit yourself. I'm not getting into a theological debate.

Frankly, Allah hasn't been doing too good a job lately in keeping Fanatic Followerd from killing innocents.

That's not up to us to decide. Do you Christians not have something called "Armaggedon"? I suppose the world is supposed to be a nice, happy, peaceful place in order for that to happen, right?

We don't know why Allah does, or doesn't do, things. We don't know any more than you do. It's not our place to know. Only Abraham was allowed such personal discourse with Allah.

Which is why Islam has been devolving from a "Religion of Peace" to one of Violent Lunatics.

Actually, it hasn't. "Religion of Peace" doesn't mean we're all tree-hugging hippies. We are to be strong and relentless fighters in defense of Islam. In defense only, however. We cannot be the aggressors.

As a matter of fact, it says in Qur'an that if a nation comes into your nation to take it over, let them. As long as they allow you to be Muslim and worship in the way Qur'an teaches, then they can have the land. It doesn't belong to us anyway. If, however, they suppress Islam, all bets are off. We are to seek them wherever they hide, kill them in very nasty ways, and not relent until they are either all dead or sincerely apologize.

<snip>

Frankly, Allah hasn't been doing too good a job lately in keeping Fanatic Followerd from killing innocents. <snip>



And neither has any other religion's vision of "God" stepped in and stopped any catastrophe. Did the Christian God stop 9/11? No. I don't believe God (I'm a non-denomination Christian), puts his hands in too much of what goes on in the world. That entity is leaving us to our own devices.

I also wanted to note, a few Muslim Fanatics are giving the average good Musilim a bad name, and causing prejudice and fear. Because of my major in college, I had more Muslims in many of my classes than Americans/Christians. Muslims from over seas. They were the nicest people ever.

A lot of this is akin to the whole world believing Jerry Fallwell speaks for all Christians, when the majority things he's a freak.

However, the Christian extremists may kill an abortion doctor or two, but not hundreds of people in the name of God/Allah/The Great Spirit, or whatever you see your higher power as.

I find people like Osama very sad for the entire Muslim religion.

I find people like Osama very sad for the entire Muslim religion.

Well then it's a good thing Osama was declared non-Muslim by the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia. He's apostate. He's not a Muslim and only non-Muslims seem to think he is.

Funny, that.

So quick to blame Islam and you don't even use an example of a Muslim.

Well then it's a good thing Osama was declared non-Muslim by the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia. He's apostate. He's not a Muslim and only non-Muslims seem to think he is.

Funny, that.

So quick to blame Islam and you don't even use an example of a Muslim.


I am not blaming Muslim, I am trying to say a few baddies are giving the large majority of good, decent Muslims a bad name.

BTW, I was unaware Osama was declared non-Muslim. Thank you for that info.

I think you get the gist of what I'm saying: A few extreme Muslims are giving the majority a bad name.

...and if I may add, in my experience, I truly have not met a Muslim I didn't like. And I knew a LOT of them.

I think you get the gist of what I'm saying: A few extreme Muslims are giving the majority a bad name.

I think that depends on how you look at it. I don't blame all of Christendom for Jerry Falwell or "godhatesfags.com" nor think it gives Christianity a bad name, why shouldn't people do the same with Islam?

I get the impression from a lot of people - not you, specifically - that everyone who follows Islam must be pure lily-white perfect in all ways or Islam is evil.

That just makes no sense to me. Contrary to popular belief, Muslims are human. Humans are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination.

I think that depends on how you look at it. I don't blame all of Christendom for Jerry Falwell or "godhatesfags.com" nor think it gives Christianity a bad name, why shouldn't people do the same with Islam?

I get the impression from a lot of people - not you, specifically - that everyone who follows Islam must be pure lily-white perfect in all ways or Islam is evil.

That just makes no sense to me. Contrary to popular belief, Muslims are human. Humans are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination.

You're exactly correct. People are people. 'Nuff said.

No conflict at all, actually, but suit yourself. I'm not getting into a theological debate. Why not? I am not even "Christian" in the modern sense of the word. I am a deist, so I wouldn't even be arguing the merits of Religion A vs Religion B - I simply want to see how you reconcile/identify the differences between Fanatic/Violent Islam and Rational Islam.

That's not up to us to decide. Do you Christians not have something called "Armaggedon"? I suppose the world is supposed to be a nice, happy, peaceful place in order for that to happen, right? As I am not a Mellinialist Christian, I do not believe in Armageddon (the "final battle" on the plain of Megiddo (or anywhere else for that matter)).

We don't know why Allah does, or doesn't do, things. We don't know any more than you do. It's not our place to know. Only Abraham was allowed such personal discourse with Allah.True, but we do have it in our power to stop violence from being committed in the name of Allah. To me actively trying to stop Fanatic Islam that sounds like a pretty good defense of your Religion.

Actually, it hasn't. "Religion of Peace" doesn't mean we're all tree-hugging hippies. We are to be strong and relentless fighters in defense of Islam. In defense only, however. We cannot be the aggressors.And Yet...
As a matter of fact, it says in Qur'an that if a nation comes into your nation to take it over, let them. As long as they allow you to be Muslim and worship in the way Qur'an teaches, then they can have the land. It doesn't belong to us anyway. So the "insurgents" comming to Iraq from other Islamic nations are not Muslims &/or they are not being agressors?
If, however, they suppress Islam, all bets are off. We are to seek them wherever they hide, kill them in very nasty ways, and not relent until they are either all dead or sincerely apologize. Oh, I get it. Define suppression. If the Clerics say that the existence of the non-muslim/secular world is, by the fact of its existence, "suppressive" to Islam, then Muslims are justified in "seek(ing) them wherever they hide, kill them in very nasty ways, and not relent until they are either all dead or sincerely apologize." Nice.
Well then it's a good thing Osama was declared non-Muslim by the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia. He's apostate. He's not a Muslim and only non-Muslims seem to think he is. He seems to think he is.... as do many, many Muslims who, as you once said, "don't pay any attention to the Saudis".

So do they or do they not pay attention to the anti-secular-america/europe rantings of the Saudis? Can't have it both ways.

Funny, that. So quick to blame Islam and you don't even use an example of a Muslim. And yet...

I think that depends on how you look at it. I don't blame all of Christendom for Jerry Falwell or "godhatesfags.com" nor think it gives Christianity a bad name, why shouldn't people do the same with Islam?I think you will find that to quite a lot of people those give Christianity in general a bad name. Christian Political/Televangelists are generally a laughingstock and cause Christianity to be be both feared and ridiculed in the World Press (Christian Fundamentalists are coming - Oh My!).... and they don't even advocate blowing people up.

I get the impression from a lot of people - not you, specifically - that everyone who follows Islam must be pure lily-white perfect in all ways or Islam is evil. That just makes no sense to me. Contrary to popular belief, Muslims are human. Humans are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination.No, I just think it's too bad that the primary Face of Islam are people who like to blow up women and children, and that the radical Clerics advocating it are not being held to account for it - by either the World Press the Muslim Street. I think it's too bad that people are willing to excuse the fact that misinterpretations of Islam are being used for Evil and that it is being excused and whitewashed.

I think that the use of Religion to drive Politics is Evil. Whether it is from Christian Fundies or Islamic Fundies. Throughout history, Religions have only been "peaceful" when they have been powerless. People (rightly) get all flustered and concerned when the US "Radical Christian Right" aspires to political power. Whenever somebody like Buchanan or Fallwell (or even GWB) spouts off or even tangentally cites Religion as a motivator to their political activities the Press and Liberal/Libertarian America starts tearing their hair out. Yet a virulent violent variation of Islam is in power in the Middle East and is blatantly using Religion to justify terrorisim but people are too sensitive/PC to adress the issue.

It just boggles the mind.