<< KRESKIN RITTER TAKES ANOTHER STAB AT IT ~ MAIN ~ LOSER CLUB >>
FOX TURNS CHICKEN
Michelle Malkin censored by Fox News:
As I tried to walk through the content of the cartoons, the camera cut from my display to video of the Islamists’ crazed, violent protests. As if we hadn’t seen enough of that already.
The media seems to have ignored all the peaceful protests around the world. As always they have achieved their goal in portraying Muslims as nut cases ready to burn and smash everything in sight.
Ever heard that 2000-3000 people had a peaceful sit in in Algiers the capital of Algeria? Ever heard of the big crowd of Indonesian that gathered in Jakarta?
And if we did here of these demonstrations, they were only a small part of the article. Futher more, the demonstrations in London have been skewed. Yes, there were a few fanatic idiots with inflammatary signs, but the majority were there just to defend someone they loved in a peaceful manner. In searching I found many photos of the demonstrations that were not portrayed in the news, because they didn’t fit their “muslims are war loving nuts” scenario.
What we need are more onjective thinkers. Everyone knows the news only gives one viewpoint.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 04:56 AM • permalinkBecause the media has always been so anti-Muslim.
Uh huh.
Posted by Mike Jericho on 2006 02 08 at 05:07 AM • permalinkWhat was your point in sending me to that link? To prove to me that some newspapers have published pro-Muslim articles? I already knew that. The fact remains that those are looked over, and small and insignificant in comparison to the constant anti-Muslim barrage. While the intention may not be to put Islam down, and give false images of Islam, the truth is that this is what is happening. A recent survey shows that 1 in 2 Victorian school kids in yrs 10 and 11 thnk that a Muslim is a Terrorist with no exception.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 05:16 AM • permalinkA recent survey shows that 1 in 2 Victorian school kids in yrs 10 and 11 thnk that a Muslim is a Terrorist with no exception.
Tell me…why do you think it is?
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 02 08 at 05:17 AM • permalinkBecause, and the study proved it, the portrayal of Islam in the media. My non-Muslim friends and family know very well that that isn’t Islam. This is only about the resources and religious education available to school kids in Australia. Can you believe the author of the survey is recommending that all school kids learn a bit about what Islam really is to combat what will become a social problem.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 05:20 AM • permalinkBecause, and the study proved it, the portrayal of Islam in the media.
Please let’s cut through the guff - it’s not as if the media is going around staging events.
In the last few years there has been a large number of terrorist attacks perpetrated by Muslims, or at least people claiming Muslim faith.
Of course children are going to pick up on that.
This is only about the resources and religious education available to school kids in Australia. Can you believe the author of the survey is recommending that all school kids learn a bit about what Islam really is to combat what will become a social problem.Bullshit. Religious education is going to do fuck all. Religious propaganda even less so.
What might help, would be if Muslims, both individually and through their religious and/or community leaders, would denounce all terrorist attacks, whether they be in Europe, the US, the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, or even, yes, Israel, you’d find people’s perceptions would change.
Until that, well, I’m afraid you are going to have to cop it.
Hey, life wasn’t meant to be easy.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 02 08 at 05:28 AM • permalinkWill someone/anyone/Miss Andrea please ‘jihad’ this ‘proud2be@muslimah’ troll thingy off of this site?
I’m thinking it’s actually David Heidelberg in drag!
btw/ David ‘mushtaq’ Heidelberg’s retirement from blogging lasted approximately three days.Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 02 08 at 05:38 AM • permalinkNo, keep her….she’s cute in her own way…
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 02 08 at 05:39 AM • permalinkQuentin is right. What has moderate Islam done to refute the extreme views? Tim found a very rare unequivocal one in Denmark on a link below but they are as rare as pigs wings. One thing is for sure the answer is NOT spending more taxpayers money telling Westerners why they are the bad guys in all this.
Posted by the nailgun on 2006 02 08 at 05:40 AM • permalinkExcuse me Deo, I’m definitely not David, whoever he was. I’m a girl to start with.And I have violated no rules. Rather I am disagreeing with you and you don’t appreciate that it is one of my rights.
Quentin, I do not deny that many attacks have been perpetrated by people claiming themselves to be muslim, under the name of Islam. But Muslim, contrary to popular opinion, does not mean terrorist. It means one who submits themself to the will of God. Islam means submission, also coming from the root words of peace and surrendering to God.
And if you would please refrain from swearing in reply to me I would appreciate it, if not I will take it along with everything else.
Peace.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 05:47 AM • permalink#11- True, she’s cute and deserves whatever she gets from the freak that
owns hertakes her as his lawful wedded wife.Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 02 08 at 05:51 AM • permalinkQuentin, I do not deny that many attacks have been perpetrated by people claiming themselves to be muslim, under the name of Islam. But Muslim, contrary to popular opinion, does not mean terrorist.
I don’t think you’ll find anyone claiming Muslim means “terrorist”, no more than Scientologist means, “looney celebrity”.
But you agree that the largest factor towards the stereotype is the actions of Muslims themselves.
Tell me….do you notice Jews and burning Arab embassies over anti-Semitic depictions of Rabbis in newspapers? Christians rioting over sacreligious depictions of Jesus? (Whom, to Christians, is God himself), Hindus destroying any place that sells beef?
It means one who submits themself to the will of God. Islam means submission, also coming from the root words of peace and surrendering to God.
Which you will find is the root of many people’s objections with that religion.
I don’t want to surrender nor submit to some uber-being just because he claims to have created the world. Power alone isn’t indicative of respect.
Remember….even if a slave doesn’t know he’s a slave….he’s still a slave.
And if you would please refrain from swearing in reply to me I would appreciate it, if not I will take it along with everything else.
Well, I will try…but you must accept that the Internet is a marketplace of the free and frank exchange of opinions. Sometimes it gets a little rowdy, and yes, sometimes your sensibilities will be offended.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 02 08 at 05:57 AM • permalinkWhat on earth are you doing with non-Muslim friends P2B - you’re not allowed to have them.
—Nora
Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2006 02 08 at 05:58 AM • permalinkThe BBC has Apologised!
the venerable BBC – never hesitating to offend prudish Christians – found itself in a “dilemma” when it had to decide whether or not to show prudish Muslims twelve, mostly inoffensive cartoons [see them here, halfway down the page] – so inoffensive in fact that alienated Danish Muslim fanatics had to add three truly offensive cartoons (of their own making?) to deliberately incite Islamic hatred against Denmark.
Payl reynolds mustt be the only beeboid who checks the blogospehere.Note the TIM Blair update type posting which is far more honest thant the usual stealth edit.
Hi
interesting info about the source of that pig cartoon. If the Danish 12 were published early on MSM - then this fact would have been detected earlier.
What does this mean - well - the deceict of the lying Imam in Denmark (I forget his name - IFHG) who shopped this issue around the middle east would have been exposed earlier.
Publish, publish publish. That is the role of a free press.
Deo, no man will ever own me, so keep on dreaming about “Islam” and what it is.
Quentin, would you actually believe that some people do see Muslim as synonomous with terrorist. And no I do not see the actions of Muslims to be the major factor, because Islam doesn’t house those people. The real terrorists are hiding behind Islam, and many leaders have denounced them. Get over it, I’m not apologising for something I never did, or something my religion doesn’t even condone.
And Muslims are proud to be slaves of God. Because each peron is a slave of something. Some to money.. they’d do anything for it. Others to their family or job.
Why do you think one of the most common Muslim names is Abdullah? It means Slave of Allah. We say as a statement of faith “I bear witness that there is no diety worthy of worship except God, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger.”
Our prophet wasn’t ashamed to be a slave of God, and neither are we.
As for people having a problem with submitting to God, well that is their problem. I’d rather submit my will to the one who created me, than one who was created.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 06:12 AM • permalinkThin man, I am allowed to have non Muslim friends.. Islam allows it. It doesn’t allow a Muslim to take them as Awliyaa, protectors. It’s very different.
Of course Muslims have non Muslim friends, and some like me even have non Muslim family.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 06:16 AM • permalinkBTW P2B
Nicky wants to know how you claim to be a 10th generation Australian.—Nora
Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2006 02 08 at 06:17 AM • permalinkAnd Muslims are proud to be slaves of God. Because each peron is a slave of something. Some to money.. they’d do anything for it. Others to their family or job.
You do realise all those examples are merely “slaves” in a figurative sense. I’m not “slave to my job” - I can quit it and get another one - it’s merely an expression used.
Why do you think one of the most common Muslim names is Abdullah? It means Slave of Allah. We say as a statement of faith “I bear witness that there is no diety worthy of worship except God, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger.”
Our prophet wasn’t ashamed to be a slave of God, and neither are we.
As for people having a problem with submitting to God, well that is their problem. I’d rather submit my will to the one who created me, than one who was created.
You don’t find anything wrong with the fact that a super being has created intelligent life to act as his slaves.???
Think about it…if I created a human being…does that mean I could use them as a slave?
The implications of this belief of yours are staggering.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 02 08 at 06:18 AM • permalink#21 Then can you explain this:
SHEIKH KHALID YASIN: There’s no such thing as a Muslim having a non-Muslim friend, so a non-Muslim could be your associate but they can’t be a friend. They’re not your friend because they don’t understand your religious principles and they cannot because they don’t understand your faith.
—NoraPosted by The Thin Man Returns on 2006 02 08 at 06:19 AM • permalinkLet me repeat this:
The fact that you create life does not morally give you the right to use it as a slave.
A god that condones slavery of humans is no better than a man who does.
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 02 08 at 06:19 AM • permalinkHi p2b
I declare that Jesus Christ is Lord, the Son of God and in fact God.
The Catholic Faith that I hold dearer than my life itself declares that there is no further revelation after the coming of Jesus.
As a Catholic Christian, I cannot countenance any further revelation and therefore your Mahomed is in my view, not a prophet.
As a Catholic Christian, I look at out history and the evolution of a healthy society, and believe that separation of Church and State is essential for a healthy society. I enjoy the ability to test ideas - and have my ideas tested by others (maybe more difficult!).
Because I don’t believe that anyone should have especial protection from “criticism”, I believe that it is imperative that the 12 cartoons be published over and over again.
When Muslim’s stop demanding special priveleges and stop making threats of violence against people expressing ideas, then I will start regarding Muslims in the same way that I regard othr groups.
Until then, Muslims are treated by most in the west in a rather patronising way one treats wayward young adults - with some leeway, some caution, but NEVER AS EQUALS.
GROW UP _ DON’T BLOW UP.
#27- Yep, Amen to that.
As a Christian I find ‘proudtobe@muslime’‘s posts offensive.
According to my religion your prophet mohamet (p.u.b.e) is Satan personified on earth.
Please do not post here any more as I may have to declare a ‘FARTWAD’ upon you!
Pull my finger pork-chop lover!Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 02 08 at 06:42 AM • permalinkAwliyaa has three meanings.
1) Allies
2) Friends
3) GuardiansInteresting that our friend chose to answer only with the third answer - that being the least offensive.
In the Muslim world, this practice is known as al-Taqiya, from the verb Ittaqu, meaning linguistically, “dodge the threat”. According to Al-Taqiya, Muslims were granted the Shar’iya (legitimacy) to infiltrate the Dar el-Harb (war zone), infiltrate the enemy’s cities and forums and plant the seeds of discord and sedition.
“O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors; they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.” (The Quran, 5:51)
“O ye who believe! Take not for friends and protectors those who take your religion for a mockery or sport - whether among those who received the Scripture before you, or among those who reject Faith; but fear ye Allah, if ye have Faith.” (The Quran, 5:57)
We know of your ways, Proud2b. More of us learn with each passing day.
Posted by Mike Jericho on 2006 02 08 at 06:48 AM • permalinkThin man, is it my fault that khalid yasin is a convert that mistranslated an arabic word. the word friend is siddeeq, and the word in the quraan is awliyaa. totally different. As for me being Aussie, I went and cehcked my family tree, I am 7th Generation Australian. Not including the guy that came on the ship. Sorry for the mistake, and I said something like 10th generation.
Quentin, slavery to God is not in the same context as slavery to human beings, and in the same way I could choose to Apostate tomorrow if I wish, serving God does not take away my free will.
Don’t worry drbob, I am in no danger of blowing up. As a Muslim I revere Jesus (Peace be upon hIm) just as much as Muhammad (Peace be upon Him). I can’t be bothered debating the trinity at the moment, but take one verse from the ten commandments “hear o isreal the lord thy god is ONE!”.And God and His prophets are always free from criticism, it doesn’t matter what people say about them, it will not change who they were or how great they were. But that does not mean that we can not protest what we see as unfit, its one of the rights of a person living in a democratic country.. and no burning and smashing are not appropriate protests.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 06:52 AM • permalinkMike, I thnk you should stop pulling anything off the internet. Awliyaa and Siddeeq have very different root words. Those verses are talking abour Allies and supporters, as in war.. *rolleyes*
And Deo, I have not said anything offensive, I revere Jesus (Peace be upon him). So I really don’t know what I have done to offend you. Let me know, because as a Muslim I must refrain from offending others.
If your problem is just that I am Muslim, then I’m sorry you have to awake to reality that the Earth is a religiously diverse place.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 06:56 AM • permalinkI take proud2be for what she says she is and I can imagine that it might be difficult for an ordinary, law abiding, muslim who is conspicuous in their faith living in the west at the present time. I sympathise, but I’m afraid they have no choice but to endure it until The Clash is resolved. The fact is Islam has come to be represented by the mullahs and the rampaging mob and it’s not up to the West to pretend otherwise. Its up to the good muslim to throw off this leadership, one way or another. Lead or be lead.
P2B - you are wasting your time on this site. The people who habit this site are not the problem you need to be solving. You’ll note there are no surveys saying every high school kid thinks buddhists to a man are terrorists. Now why is that? Stop your “colleagues” engaging in violence and I think you’ll find kids thinking all Muslims are terrorists might stop too.
It is going to be very hard educating kids that Islam is the religion of peace at school that day and then they turn on the telly to see Zarqawi has just sent a suicide bomber into a group of Iraqi school kids.Posted by the nailgun on 2006 02 08 at 07:04 AM • permalinki would hazard a guess that 2BE is a convet to Islam and quite young. she or perhaps he has been seduced into abandonning christianity and is still at the “Honey moon stage. i doubt that there are any seven generation Muslims in Australia.
A few years down the track an with an enquiring mind, we may see a metmorphosis into a Hirst Ali, one of the world’s bravest apostates.Hi
p2b - I did not post to start a discussion on the Holy Trinity - so your attempt to start quoting “verses” is not useful. Such issues are not dealt with at the level of “verses” - but of ideas expressed in essays or books or even libraries. There is some sophistication in the ideas involved.
The issue we in the West have with Islam is its propensity to violence - surely I don’t have to document that - and its demand for special treatment in the societies that it finds itself.
The fact that Muslems are often not criticised as much in the West as other groups in society is the threat of violence that rather discourages debate.
This however makes Islam the Elephant in the room that no one talks about - but everyone understands that the elephant is there and that it is very aggressive. Muslims are therefore “tolerated” in a different way from all other groups in Western society.
This form of “tolerance” is actually quite condescending to Islam and a very poor reflection of how Islam is really viewed in the West.
I look at the mayhem, violence and murder that seem to be daily occurences in the press when it comes to reporting Muslim issues - and wonder whether St Bernard should maybe have preached a more effective sermon.
Wrong davo im young but second generation muslim.
i have to go pray, ill be back to answer the rest
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 07:28 AM • permalink“Mike, I thnk you should stop pulling anything off the internet. Awliyaa and Siddeeq have very different root words. Those verses are talking abour Allies and supporters, as in war.. *rolleyes*”
P2B, who are you rolling your eyes at?
Yourself, perhaps? Because it seems that you don’t know that Islam regards all non-Islamic lands as Dar el-Harb, or “lands of war”.
That does not just mean those lands where guns are being fired. It means lands where Muslims are still attempting to beome the majority population.
What Mosque do you attend, P2B? Who is the local Imam?
Because I suspect that you are David Heidelberg, up to his usual tricks.
Posted by Mike Jericho on 2006 02 08 at 07:29 AM • permalinkWell P2b you seem to have taken a very moderate and reasonable interpretation of the Islamic faith. And I’m prepared to accept that you are a young Muslim high school girl, my original doubts notwithstanding.
You must acknowledge though that there is a significant portion of Muslims who have chosen to interpret the Koran in very different ways and use it to justify behaviour that (to put it mildly) isn’t consistent with modern democratic societies.
For instance, forgetting terrorism for a minute, we are not making up stories of oppression of women in certain Islamic countries. Whether you feel they have interpreted the Koran wrongly to justify this is irrelevant. This oppression is real and quoting excerpts from the Koran showing that women are meant to be exalted won’t wash. Also saying that this oppression isn’t true Islam is a bit rich. Countries like Saudi Arabia base their whole governance on Islamic law.
We’re not blaiming you for the extreme elements but they do exist and they are not an insignificant proportion.
And yes (just to anticipate your reply) in Christianity you will find people who take harsher and more extreme interpretations of the Bible’s teachings but they seem to manage to fit in to democratic society and attempt to influence through the democratic process, not by burning buildings or threatening authors, artists, directors etc with death.
From what i’ve read of your posts, if all Muslims genuinely thought like you seem to we wouldn’t need to have this debate. Just like you won’t see us debating Bhuddists or Hindus in this manner.
I would have to agree with proud2be’s assessment in #2 re the MSM’s portrayal. They are simply doing their job, i.e. never letting accuracy getting in the way of a good story.
Some of the comments directed at proud2be can hardly be considered nuanced, and border on incitement, which is hardly the Aussie way to win an argument.
The ideological battle is against Islamism.
It would be better to ask questions to determine support for/opposition to Islamism.
Here are the questions for proud2be (hat tip Daniel Pipes):
1. Do you condone or condemn the Palestinians, Chechens, and Kashmiris who give up their lives to kill enemy civilians?
2. Will you condemn by name as terrorist groups such organizations as Abu Sayyaf, Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya, Groupe islamique armée, Hamas, Harakat ul-Mujahidin, Hizbullah, Islamic Jihad, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, and Al-Qaeda?
3. Should Muslim women have equal rights with men (for example, in inheritance shares or court testimony)?
4. Is jihad, meaning a form of warfare, acceptable in today’s world?
5. Do you accept the validity of other religions?
6. Do Muslims have anything to learn from the West?
7. Should non-Muslims enjoy completely equal civil rights with Muslims?
8. May Muslims convert to other religions?
9. May Muslim women marry non-Muslim men?
10. Do you accept the laws of a majority non-Muslim government and unreservedly pledge allegiance to that government?
11. Should the state impose religious observance, such as banning food service during Ramadan?
12. When Islamic customs conflict with secular laws (e.g., covering the face for drivers’ license pictures), which should give way?
13. Are Sufis and Shi’ites fully legitimate Muslims?
14. Do you see Muslims who disagree with you as having fallen into unbelief?
15. Is takfir (condemning fellow Muslims one has disagreements with as unbelievers) an acceptable practice?
16. Do you accept the legitimacy of scholarly inquiry into the origins of Islam?
17. Who was responsible for the 9/11 suicide hijackings?
18. Do you accept enhanced security measures to fight militant Islam, even if this means extra scrutiny of yourself (for example, at airline security)?
19. Do you agree that institutions accused of funding terrorism should be shut down, or do you see this a symptom of bias?
20. Do you accept that Western countries are majority-Christian and secular or do you seek to transform them into majority-Muslim countries ruled by Islamic law?
From Mick Hartley, on this hypocrite member of British cartoon society (One suspects it’s also true of others):
Tim Benson - founder of the Political Cartoon Gallery - in the course of an article on the hazards faced by political cartoonists:
The Times cartoonist Peter Brookes believes that being provocative for the sake of it is not only “meaningless but also invariably leads to injury or violence to someone. If you asked the Muhammad cartoonists whether they were glad now, I’m sure that they’d say no.” After the July 7 bombings Brookes’s cartoon drawing an “immoral equivalence” between the atrocity and the bombing of Iraq led to reader criticism.
OTOH,
It’s perhaps worth recalling Tim Benson’s words at the time his society decided to give the Cartoon of the Year award to the Sharon baby-eating picture:
Mr Benson said the cartoon was a criticism of Mr Sharon and his policies, not a harangue against Jews. “I’m probably the most hated person in British Jewry now,” he said. “Jewish groups around the world are up in arms. These hysterical idiots are coming onto my site and calling me a Nazi. Do they not want people to have the freedom to express themselves?
“You couldn’t meet a nicer guy than Dave Brown. Cartoonists depict George Bush and Tony Blair in exactly the same way. If a cartoonist attacks the Israeli prime minister, it’s not necessarily anti-Semitic. Dave left the Star of David off the helicopters in the background.
“You can like or dislike a cartoon, but how can I censor a competition in which cartoonists submit their work? The cartoon was chosen because of its impact.
Stirring sentiments, and one can indeed sympathise: how can you censor cartoonists in a society based on the principles of free expression? Well in this society, as it turns out, it’s very easy. You threaten them.
Actually, see #2, the mainstream media bends over backwards to AVOID any offensive words about Muslims. At least, Age and Herald Sun.
Study finds no bias against Muslims
NEITHER The Age nor the Herald Sun is biased against Muslims, a study of news coverage by the two newspapers has found. The study, by Monash University academics Shahram Akbarzadeh and Bianca Smith, of 451 articles judged that only 5 per cent of news articles about Muslims in The Age were negative, and 24 per cent in the Herald Sun.
The Age 13/12/2005 Cost - $2.20 165 wordsproud2be@muslimah:
It’s an oft-quoted but obvious truth that whilst not all Muslims are terrorists, nearly all terrorists in recent times are Muslims. What do you think it is about your faith that drives a small (but significant) proportion of its followers to commit atrocities against the rest of humanity, in the name of Allah? Why don’t members of other faiths act in such ways? What can be done to stop this cancer that’s growing within the Islamic movement?
I appreciate you have your hands full discussing this topic in a thread containing so many who don’t agree with you, however can I suggest you ignore those that are too immature to be polite, or are deliberately offensive. I do not think your own conduct (which is irrelevant of your religious beliefs) in this forum warrants such behaviour.
Posted by James Waterton on 2006 02 08 at 08:02 AM • permalinkI do not think your own conduct (which is irrelevant of your religious beliefs) in this forum warrants such behaviour.
I made this distinction for the benefit of others, so that I would not be accused of being politically correct.
Posted by James Waterton on 2006 02 08 at 08:05 AM • permalinkMike the local masjid I attend is ran by, would you believe it, none other than my father. So I should think that I have a pretty good grasp of what Islam is. And no my dad doesn’t advocate violence, much the opposite, he calls for demonstrating within the bounds of the law.
FrancisH, I’m glad to know, I’m now who I am. You made one mistake in your post though. Saudi isn’t governed by all Islamic law. Islam doesn’t believe in dynasties.. It believes in the religious leaders choosing the most appropriate person for the job.
Ok, Angela, great to know someone here knows something, and knows that the way to win an argument isn’t to belittle the opposition. I will gladly answer all your questions.
1. Do you condone or condemn the Palestinians, Chechens, and Kashmiris who give up their lives to kill enemy civilians?
No, Islam and me both do not condone the killing of civilians. But I must say that I don’t support the US armies killing of civilians either. But treat others as you wish to be treated. Muslims can not kill civilians and it’s sad to see them think they can.
2. Will you condemn by name as terrorist groups such organizations as Abu Sayyaf, Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya, Groupe islamique armée, Hamas, Harakat ul-Mujahidin, Hizbullah, Islamic Jihad, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, and Al-Qaeda?
No I will not condemn a whole group of Muslims. Sorry I will condemn those who I know to have done some un-Islimic act, but I will not condemn a whole group. If a group is known for terrorist activity and it has been proven, then maybe, but I have yet to come across any group that I know other than by a name in the media.
3. Should Muslim women have equal rights with men (for example, in inheritance shares or court testimony)?
I am a young woman and I say that inheritance shouldn’t be the same. But let me tell you why. When a Muslim woman works, all the money earned is hers. Her husband can not tell her when why and how to spend it and he can not take it form her. He must still clothe her and the kids and feed them and take care of all their needs. This is why Islam gives more inheritance to the man. Becuase he is responsible for spending that very money on his mother, wife, kids, sisters etc, while the womans inheritance is for her alone. I’d ratehr keep my inheritance to myself than have the same amount and have to spend it on my whole family.
4. Is jihad, meaning a form of warfare, acceptable in today’s world?
If you knew the rules of jihad it would not scare you. You would be very safe. I believe that Muslims have every right to defend themselves physically if being attacked phyiscally, and this is what jihaad is. Allah said “fight those that kill you and drive you out of your homes”. This is almost every countries policy. We would not stand still and let other s attack Australia and the US, in the same way Muslims defend their land.
5. Do you accept the validity of other religions?
Obviously I believe Islam is the truth, otherwise I wouldn’t be a Muslim. But I have no problem with other people belonging to other religions. Allah said “there is no compulsion in religion”. To each his own.
6. Do Muslims have anything to learn from the West?
If you mean in knowledge and technology yes, if you mean religiously no, because we believe Islam was perfected 1400 yrs ago.
7. Should non-Muslims enjoy completely equal civil rights with Muslims?
Yes they should, and in a real Shariah they would.
8. May Muslims convert to other religions?
If they wish, but I obviously don’t think it’s a good idea.
9. May Muslim women marry non-Muslim men?
I know you won’t liek this, but no. I’d be a loser to say about my religion what I know isn’t true.
10. Do you accept the laws of a majority non-Muslim government and unreservedly pledge allegiance to that government?
I f you mean obey the law, then yes. But if you want me to do something against my relgion I’ll move somewhere else. Like no way am I going to stop praying, or remove my scarf or go fight Muslims in some other country. The government can do what they wish, but part of democracy is the freedom I get too.
11. Should the state impose religious observance, such as banning food service during Ramadan?
In a Muslim a Muslim state? I’m not sure, i have never researched this topic. In a non-Muslim state no:D
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 08:26 AM • permalinkI will take proud2be at face value.
Dear proud,
Your problem is not with what you perceive to be a hostile anti-Islam climate. The problem is with a powerful and utterly determined movement that among other things seeks to hi-jack Islam. The problem is within.
It is the terrorists and Islamo-fascists who preach only hate who are your problem. It is they who defile your religion. A fistful of irreverent cartoons are no threat to Islam. On the other hand, every suicide attack, every terrorist act, every threat, every murder, every slander and racist or antisemitic slur, every lie in the name of Islam is a savage blow to the very core of Islam as you have explained the faith here.
To seek to justify all of this or even to remain silent while it happens is to join the attack on your religion. You should not, I will suggest, spend too much time arguing with us. No one here has any wish to harm anybody. There is a lot of anger because we see our values, our countries, our lives and our families’ lives and future threatened, and with good reason. They are threatened by the same forces that defile Islam. We will defend our values and ourselves.
You should defend Islam before it is too late. The blood dripping marauders who would plunder all that is devine and spiritual in your faith and trample your religion in to the dust forever are not at the gates. They are within the gates and they challenge the Prophet and God himself.
They will not be satisfied with the debasement and destruction of your religion. They will not be satisfied even with the enslavement of Muslims and all humankind. They want to enslave the souls of all women and men and the human spirit itself.
To fight them will take courage. You cannot do it on your own. You will need the help of other Muslims. Your weapons will be language, the media and education. Whatever help you need from us you only need to ask. This is our battle too. But it is mainly your fight. Muslims have to lead this fight. It is you who must be in the front line.
Take Courage
Peace
12. When Islamic customs conflict with secular laws (e.g., covering the face for drivers’ license pictures), which should give way?
I think that the law should be reviewed, because we are a democracy and people do have the right to practice their religions. But if ther law is you need a picture in the drivers’ licence then so be it. I hold a passport, and I do not have my face covered in the picture. And just a note, it’s not a custom, it’s a law.
13. Are Sufis and Shi’ites fully legitimate Muslims?
Depends on the extent of their Shirk. I wouldn’t say they are not Muslim as a group, but I do believe that some of them have very unislamic ideas.
14. Do you see Muslims who disagree with you as having fallen into unbelief?
No, everyone is entitled to their opinion. there are criteria for someone to fall into to disbelief. And disagreeing with proud2be@muslimah isn’t one of them.
15. Is takfir (condemning fellow Muslims one has disagreements with as unbelievers) an acceptable practice?
NO NO NO NO NO. Do you get how strongly I feel on this subject? This is the probelme with the Muslims. And anyway the scholars of Islam didn’t allow it. And the Prophet (Peace be upon him ) said : “If one of you calls your brother (in Islam) a Kaafir, then one of you is a Kaafir.” Meaning if they aren’t worthy of the tag Kaafir, rthen you have committed disbelief.
16. Do you accept the legitimacy of scholarly inquiry into the origins of Islam?
Do you mean are people allowed to search into where Islam came from? Why not? Islam doesn’t tell people to blidly follow.. It encourages it’s followers to be at ease with their decision and that means making sure you know what you’re following.
17. Who was responsible for the 9/11 suicide hijackings?
Allahu A’lam God knows best. If it was a muslim then it was wrong, but I have seen many western documentaries that showed a different perspective. if it was who the media say it was, then I am of course against it, no excuses.
18. Do you accept enhanced security measures to fight militant Islam, even if this means extra scrutiny of yourself (for example, at airline security)?
I don’t think that Islam is a threat to society. Muslims are too busy fighting in their homelands to care what’s happening on this side of the World.
And no I don’t agree inocent people whould be put to scrutiny for being Muslim. This happened to my family,a nd although we were apologised to it doesn’t make a difference. It gives you a feeling of being ostricised when someone tells you you can’t fly becuase you are a security risk when you never did anything other than look Muslim. They withdrew the comments after and offered us another flight, but the fact is, that it is acts like these that brew hatred in some Muslims.
19. Do you agree that institutions accused of funding terrorism should be shut down, or do you see this a symptom of bias?
If they are in fact funding terrorism then shut them down. But prove it, don’t presume it.
20. Do you accept that Western countries are majority-Christian and secular or do you seek to transform them into majority-Muslim countries ruled by Islamic law?
Not unless they wish to be, but I do believe that it is the right of Muslims in majority Muslim countries to also establish the law as they wish.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 08:26 AM • permalinkp2b
“Ever heard that 2000-3000 people had a peaceful sit in in Algiers the capital of Algeria? Ever heard of the big crowd of Indonesian that gathered in Jakarta? ”
Express yourself again when those numbers you typed with a population of approximately 1.2-1.6 billion, (at this moment in time) Muslims, reach 99-100% of the Muslim population.
Until that occurs, until you can control and eliminate the islama-psychopaths, Until you can control and eliminate the mental lepers, Until you can control and eliminate those among you, that you say, do not represent Islam, you have nothing to say, or type that interests me, one iota.
Others here may think differently, that is their choice and right.
Oh don’t worry geoff I work on both fronts. I work with the my fellow youth here, to try and break down their hatred at being ostricised. I also try to do dialogue with people from across the barrier that is being erected. I know that there is a probelm with how the Muslims view Islam, but many youth are just so angry at what is happening in Muslim countries that they thing anything is justified. But it is not. Islam is a religion that has limits. And Allah said “Do not transgress the limits”.
And James, my ettiquette is a result of my Isalm. If I did not love my religion enough to come here, why would I sit and type stupid imflammatory things which harm my religion more. I more than anyone know that non Muslims judge Islam by Muslims actions.
And as for what you were saying, Muslims feel that they need to assimilate to be accepted and they don’t want to do that, yes they will integrate, but they won’t immitate. We are Muslim, that is what we are, and while we will accept everyone and every other belief, the youth want assurance that Islam will be accepted too. The next generation is the key, you have people who don’t even know what Isalm means, but thney will rip your head of if you criticise it. they just need to be educated on what their religion is.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 08:36 AM • permalinkI don’t get this protest at all.
Muslims, if you are mad at Jyllands-Posten, then don’t buy it. Send letters to the editor. Whatever.
But why do you they take it out on the Danish government, unrelated Danish companies (Arla) and Denmark as a whole?
Isn’t that the definition of racism – treating a whole country with the ‘sins’ of just one of their number?
Muslims are bleating that they hate being victims of this kind of stereotyping, but are happy to engage in it themselves.
Posted by Flying Giraffe on 2006 02 08 at 08:37 AM • permalinkBut those that violently demonstarted are also only a very small proportion of the Muslim nation, so I don’t see your point. There will always be some fanatics.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 08:38 AM • permalinkI partly agree with you Flying Giraffe, but I think there is one small difference. When we are asked to condemn the acts that Islam and the West don’t agree with, then we do so, ie 9/11. But when Muslim leaders called for the Western Governments to condemn these actions then they refused sayng it was freedom of speech. Therefore in the Muslims eyes they became just as guilty.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 08:41 AM • permalinkP2B - thanks for your courage in a forum that so obviously disagrees with you.
I am loath to debate you on the theory of your religion as it is yours and not mine. Aspects of the actual practice of it is what causes discomfort and - yes - even fear.
I agree that not all followers of Islam are terrorists - it would be ridiculous to state so. I’m not even saying that most followers are fanatics - again, that’s boiling down the discussion to kindy level. However, one thing I’ve learnt after fleeing from a brutal dictatorship is that unless good people stand up for what is good in their culture, and either prevent or unequivacally condemn evil done in their name, EVERYONE becomes complicit. It’s not fair, for example, that black women are often seen as “hoes” but as long as black rappers keep spewing their lyrics and my brothers and sisters keep buying their albums, I can’t very well condemn white people for expecting black women to be shallow, vulgar sex objects. Good people should defend the good and attack the evil. And evil is burning down buildings and threatening terrorist attacks because of a set of cartoons. It’s not rational and casts Muslims in a bad light to most people who haven’t had exposure to the peaceful religion you profess Islam to be.
Thanks again for participating - I hope you stick around on the site as tolerance should go both ways, guys!
Posted by Black Chick on 2006 02 08 at 08:55 AM • permalinkI take my hat off to P2B. Her faith is clearly a comfort and provides her with an inner poise not often seen in the comments section of blogs. She has clearly thought deeply about what she believes and has a coherent and intelligent view of her role in this world and her relationship to its creator. She is polite, calm and rational. All the characteristics, in fact, of a person I would like to call friend.
Recently, my closest friend of many years married a Muslim woman and converted to do so. He has taken another name, now lives in a Muslim dominated country, is devout and takes his role as a Muslim husband seriously. Little has changed between us. In fact, he is calmer and happier than I have ever seen him. I could not be happier for him.
I am not a Muslim, but I understand only too clearly P2B’s implication that total freedom only comes from total commitment - seemingly a paradox to many but aboslutely true. Those who have never totally committed themselves to something may not understand it, but I can see that it makes perfect sense to P2B and informs her life. It makes perfect sense to me, too, and informs my life as well.
May peace be with us all.
Thank You robf and Black Chick for your support. Let me tell you that if I didn’t care about how Islam is seen I wouldn’t be here. I know the Muslims need to work within their own community on this, but we also need to reach out and show others that we are just as sane and human as them. From your post you said that some aspects of Islam frighten you. Would it be intrusive of your privacy to ask what those aspects were?
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 08:59 AM • permalinkHanyu, thank you. I often find that when someone knows a Muslim personally it makes it alot easier to understand Islam. Like my Grandma and Aunts and Uncle don’t see what the problem is with people that they think Islam condones acts of terror. But that is becuase they know us and we are family and they actually love someone from the “other side”. And all I can say is that when I started on this blog I was abused like there was no tomorrow, but keeping my calm and staying patient proved definitely to be a virtue, just as God said.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 09:04 AM • permalink#52 When we are asked to condemn the acts that Islam and the West don’t agree with, then we do so, ie 9/11. But when Muslim leaders called for the Western Governments to condemn these actions then they refused sayng it was freedom of speech. Therefore in the Muslims eyes they became just as guilty.
This is taking the argument of moral equivalence to a ridiculous extreme. The west demanded condemnation of the perpetrators of 9/11 because thousands died. Mad mullahs demand the death penalty for the offence caused by cartoons. That kind of thinking scares the hell out of me. Until moderate muslims can demonstrate that the majority of those who follow islam reject suicide bombing and terror attacks by withdrawing support from the regimes promoting them, rather than just asserting they deplore violence, pardon me if i continue to stick my fingers in my ears while they protest “we’re not really like that”.
Sorry KK if my similie upset you. I don’t condone the calling of the mullahs for the death of the perpertrators. That is not Islam. All I was trying to say was that to the muslims when the governemnts refused to condemn them then they became just like those that drew them. And thereffore the Muslims decided to boycott them all. And I see this as a peaceful way of demonstrating which is alot better than burning things.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 09:10 AM • permalinkmmca, I’m sorry that you see me as delusional, but I’m not sure how I could debate that, as you are obviously convinced. So unless you meet me and can be sure I’m totally worthy of being debated with, I guess you will have to ignore me.
Peace
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 09:12 AM • permalinkNo I will not condemn a whole group of Muslims. Sorry I will condemn those who I know to have done some un-Islimic act, but I will not condemn a whole group. If a group is known for terrorist activity and it has been proven, then maybe, but I have yet to come across any group that I know other than by a name in the media.
This is all we need to know, folks. I have no problem condemning groups that admit to terrorist acts, but when asked to condemn Muslim terrorist groups, P2B dodges.
7. Who was responsible for the 9/11 suicide hijackings?
Allahu A’lam God knows best. If it was a muslim then it was wrong, but I have seen many western documentaries that showed a different perspective. if it was who the media say it was, then I am of course against it, no excuses.
Again, denial of self-evident truth. Bin Laden confessed to being behind 9/11, yet P2B plays the “different perspective” card.
P2B is clearly not what any of us would consider a moderate Muslim.
But when Muslim leaders called for the Western Governments to condemn these actions then they refused sayng it was freedom of speech. Therefore in the Muslims eyes they became just as guilty.
And here we see the nub of the problem.
P2B, there is no guilt in publishing these cartoons. And governments are justified in saying they will not condemn the cartoons, because it’s none of the governments’ damned business.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 09:14 AM • permalinkWhen we are asked to condemn the acts that Islam and the West don’t agree with, then we do so, ie 9/11.
Yet you will not admit that Muslims were involved in 9/11, and refuse to condemn the admitted perpetrators!
You’re lying to us from one breath to another!
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 09:17 AM • permalinkExactly rob crawford, the Muslims have just as much right to boycott Denmark.
And I’m sorry that you have taken my comments the wrong way. I said clearly that if he did it then I don’t condone him or his group. But the reality is that many people don’t agree with this, enough to spend money producing films to the contrary. And with modern day equipment it’s easy to make anyone say whatever you want, and this si my hesitation in condemning him. If he did I condemn him, if that is not good enough then I am sorry, but I will not say about something I’m not sure of, I’m sure.
And my reason for not condemning the whole group is the same as the reaction of people who are upset that the whole of Denmark was boycotted. Just because some people claim to have commited something under a groups name, doen’t mean the whole group agreed with it.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 09:20 AM • permalinkP2B - it frightens me that near absolute power can be given to mortals in the name of a supreme being to police what is ostensibly ight and what is wrong without any need to provide justification other than that “it is written”, or some such.
Having worked with black female non-Muslim Sudanese from Darfur, it frightens me what vicious and sadistic punishments can be meted out to (and I’m quoting directly from a general I had the misfortune of running into) “infidels”
Most of all, I guess it frightens me that the apparent tautology of the religion makes it fundamentally closed to tolerance and respect for difference of thought. Not necessarily individually of course, but knowing that whatever I do, whatever I say, however tolerant I am, I will still be seen as an enemy as long as I am non-Muslim is pretty scary!
I have always acknowledged that fear tends to lead to stupid responses and obscures others points of view…what worries me is that we are now all gripped in ever increasing fear of each other so stupid things will happen. I’m glad to have you on this forum as you have argued coherently and sensitively. I hope I will do the same from now on! :)
Posted by Black Chick on 2006 02 08 at 09:20 AM • permalinkPlease don’t “peace “me. It’s clear that I didn’t say you “were delusional” rather that arguing with someone from the background of a revealed religion about their (core) beliefs is about as useful as trying to convince someone that their primary experience is erroneous, that they are not who they are. If you can’t stick with the argument then do not be snide.
p2b, I think you’ve reminded us of something we should always remember but tend to forget in the heat of the moment: that all faiths have their fanatics and that condemning Islam the religion for 9/11 and the rest is about as sensible as condemning Christianity the religion because of the KKK. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and insights - and for your patience and grace under fire.
Black Chick, very frightening fears, but I hope will be able to allay them.
As for the law of Islam, all I can say is that none of the laws are frightening, in fact the truth is that regardless of how muslims act the law of the quran gives all people equality and the right to practice whatever religion they please. And as for Muslims saying that if it is in the Quraan it is enough for them, this is because we believe it is Gods word, and I have not come across anything, that when put into perspective is frightening.
As for torture, it is not condoned in Islam. If Muslims are at war, if they capture someone they must feed them clothe them and look after their health as they would themselves. And if they killed an enemy they must not mutilate them but they must bury them with dignity. What muslims are doing may be different, but this is what Islam says.
And as for you being viewed as the enemy, you are not. The only ones that are viewed as enemies are those that hate Islam and the Muslims.
All I can say is that people may have something to fear in extreme muslims that take Islam as their banner. But people have nothing to fear from Islam itself.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 09:28 AM • permalinkI’m sorry if I seemed snide, and I say peace quite often as it is a Muslim greeting in arabic its SALAM. If you do not like it I will desist. And how do you propose I debate with you when you say it is pointless? I didn’t know we were arguing. :S Would you like to debate with me on something?
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 09:31 AM • permalinkP2b – I also thank you for your reply and for your contribution. I think part of the reason for the hostility you may have encountered is that from time to time there have been contributors on this who pretend to be Muslim to wind up the regulars.
Another question for you if I may.
If it is true that it is only a minority involved in terror contrary to Koranic teachings, why has the majority been so utterly unsuccessful in keeping a lid on it? By any standards the majority has been hopeless at it, which is strange considering that the peaceful majority has such a strong personal interest in keeping the mad minority under wraps.
I don’t think it is because the majority lacks the money or the social structures to put a lid on these idiots. The only reason I can think of is that they lack the will to do so – perhaps the ‘minority’ is really larger and more powerful than Muslim apologists like to portray? Or are they intimidated and frightened from within their own ranks?
Christianity has had its share of nutters, but by and large they haven’t been allowed by the majority to last very long. Why can’t Islam do the same?
Posted by Flying Giraffe on 2006 02 08 at 09:33 AM • permalinkNo rob crawford, I’m not lying. I said that that is what we are asked to condemn, and we do condemn it if a Muslim did it. But for me, a video that could’ve been dubbed isn’t enough. But have my full promise that if evidence that couldn’t be refuted was provided or if I happened to meet OBL one day and he said yes, then I would tell him to his face that I thought he was wrong.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 09:35 AM • permalink#70 - good points which I can’t argue about because I’m sure they are possibly true in theory. It’s the PRACTISE of Islam by some of its leaders and proponents that is frightening. For me, this isn’t about debating what should be, only what is actually happening. And unfortunately what is actually happening doesn’t make Muslims appear able to accept, let alone embrace, Western civilisation. I find it difficult to believe that any religion can see what is happening in reaction to cartoons as justified, so I’m trying to understand why thousands of Muslims appear to think that it is.
Posted by Black Chick on 2006 02 08 at 09:36 AM • permalinkSam I apologised for it #60.. it was only a similie. I never said it was the same, I was trying to get a point across.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 09:36 AM • permalinkNo rob crawford, I’m not lying. I said that that is what we are asked to condemn, and we do condemn it if a Muslim did it. But for me, a video that could’ve been dubbed isn’t enough. But have my full promise that if evidence that couldn’t be refuted was provided or if I happened to meet OBL one day and he said yes, then I would tell him to his face that I thought he was wrong.
Dodge, dodge, dodge, dodge, dodge, dodge.
*shrug*
You’ve demonstrated all I need to know about you.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 09:40 AM • permalinkBlack Chick. Oh, they don’t agree with the violent reactions, such as the firebombing of the embassies and other such actions. In fact Muslims have criticsed those same people. But as for the boycott I see it as a totally democratic and legitimate and legal way of protesting.
Some Muslims may appear to be happy about it, but it is only because the cartoons upset them, and then in turn they are happy to see the countries “responsible” damaged. (even though it was the press not the governmnet). But those Muslims that torched things are a minority. Many muslims held peaceful protests, and sit ins. Others like me chose to ratehr engage in dialogue, to clear the barriers, and still yet more chose boycotting. But those 50,000 or whatever that did violent actions are only the minorityu of a religion whose followers are one fourth of the world.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 09:42 AM • permalinkIf you see me to be dodging then that is up to you Rob Crawford. I will not condemn someone for something I am not entirely sure they did. And I’ve already said countless times that if it was a muslim then they were wrong.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 09:43 AM • permalink#77 gosh! I can’t believe I’m saying this but I think you had made up your mind about P2B early on - not much point in debating then, except perhaps to spew?
Posted by Black Chick on 2006 02 08 at 09:44 AM • permalink#78 P2B, yes the violent rioters were the minority. But one would expect the voices of condemnation of 50,000 peaceful protesters to be louder than we have seen for the actions of a relatively small number of members of their own communities? Silence - to many of the rest of us - can sometimes be seen as complicity
Posted by Black Chick on 2006 02 08 at 09:49 AM • permalink#55. I’m with you, Hanyu. Such poise and erudition, and looking at the sheer volume of her posts, she must type like a whirlwind. Her grammar has also improved outasight since last night. Kinda puts a different face on the RoP,
which desperately needs more like her to balance the overstimulated baboons that usually seem to typify the creed.In response #73- Flying Giraffe.
Another question for you if I may.
If it is true that it is only a minority involved in terror contrary to Koranic teachings, why has the majority been so utterly unsuccessful in keeping a lid on it? By any standards the majority has been hopeless at it, which is strange considering that the peaceful majority has such a strong personal interest in keeping the mad minority under wraps.
I don’t think it is because the majority lacks the money or the social structures to put a lid on these idiots. The only reason I can think of is that they lack the will to do so – perhaps the ‘minority’ is really larger and more powerful than Muslim apologists like to portray? Or are they intimidated and frightened from within their own ranks?
I think that there is a problem with people having little knowledge. If they understood the teachings of Islam and implemented them they would gain the respect of society. It was when Muslims started to act contrary to Islam that they became one of the most disrespected nations.
No, people are not afraid to condemn those that are wrong. In fact they are continuously doing so. A lid has been kept on these people that you call terrorists. I would like to say that while I don’t agree with the peopel that carry out terrorist attcks I can see why they do it. Why they feel driven.
In Iraq, they feel they will never get rid of the occupation, so they blow themselves up along with a soldier and 20 civilians. This is not condoned,in fact it is condemed, but they are often acts of desperation.
I think that the West also has a role to play in this whole problem. They need to assure Muslims that they will accept them as Muslims. Because many youth feel that “they won’t accept me, so I might as well do such and such”.
Muslims need to educate themselves on what Islam is, and the non-Muslims need to tolerate those muslims that pose no threat.
Peace.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 09:54 AM • permalinkThey need to assure Muslims that they will accept them as Muslims. Because many youth feel that “they won’t accept me, so I might as well do such and such”.
So if I was to drive around the streets of, say, Saudi Arabia with my hair flowing, my nails painted and a pair of jeans (perhaps the latest Beyonce line!), the Muslims there would accept my culture? If they don’t, am I justified in then rioting?
Posted by Black Chick on 2006 02 08 at 10:00 AM • permalink#82 Black Chick, I think it’s quite reasonable for p2b to be concerned primarily to defend Islam and muslims from the general accusation of complicity in terrorism and violence rather than with condemning the few (stlll too numerous) who resort to it. It’s a perspective to needs to be heard, listened to and respected, particularly at times like these when oceans of easy condemnation are available on tap and ARE being tapped, every day, everywhere on the blogosphere.
the kite, I do. I tell my peers and my father, the leader of a congregation tells the people that attend. I tell muslims, but I also reach out and touch base with the “opposition”.
And I’m one female teenager, that no isn’t brave how you think I am, what drove me to debate here was the fact that my religion compells me to tell the truth and it also tells me to argue “in the best manner”. If it wasn’t for the fact that I was Muslim I would’ve lost my patience and gone to my homework long ago.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 10:01 AM • permalinkA bit more dodging…! This list is in English and “peace” (as I’m sure you are aware) is condescending in reply to a serious statement. Also “argument” or even disagreement isn’t necessarily to be avoided,shold not lead to personal/ ad hominem attacks (or to public violence!) So peaceful greetings to you too.
This is all we need to know, folks. I have no problem condemning groups that admit to terrorist acts, but when asked to condemn Muslim terrorist groups, P2B dodges.
...
Again, denial of self-evident truth. Bin Laden confessed to being behind 9/11, yet P2B plays the “different perspective” card.
P2B is clearly not what any of us would consider a moderate Muslim.
Obligatory devil’s advocate response: What if she is?
This goes back to something I mentioned on the other thread. It appears to be very easy to get Muslims to condemn hypothetical transgressors of Islam’s rules, but utterly impossible to get a condemnation of specific, real ones. Everything’s a matter of perspective, everything comes down to plausible deniability, nobody’s ever truly guilty of anything, nevermind if it requires the complete denial of objective reality.
As long as there’s such near-zero introspective capability among Muslims, nothing will change - I’m beginning to understand just why there’s no uprising of moderate Muslims against the Islamist beasts that are perverting their faith.
So, I thank proud2be for her candid answers, but frankly, I’m more depressed about the long-term prospects of Islam coexisting peacefully with everybody else than I was before these threads.
(I also think that those around the blogosphere who have answered the “Islam needs its own Luther and its own reformation” line of thinking with “he’s already there” [and they variously mean either bin Laden or al-Wahhab] are probably on the right track.)
Black Chick the peaceful ones are all those ones you aren’t seeing, the ones that either liek me verbally express myself, or in writing, and the ones that boycott goods. They are all peaceful.
As for going like that in Saudi Arabia, that country is not governed by Shariah, and I’m sure that you would not be allowed to do so, but it may be that Saudi is creating a place where people who want nothing to do with Western culture can live, without the fear that they will be ostricised. They can be the majority. And yes you could write to the government in response and you could boycott their goods. But rioting isn’t condoned for anyone.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 10:06 AM • permalinkI see our our new resident muslim missionary is hijacking another thread, and indulging in goal post moving, blame deflection, and simple disrepect.
Too bad this cretin wasn’t banned.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 02 08 at 10:09 AM • permalinkmmca, I’m sorry. I don’t take peace as being condecending, because while english is my one and only langhuage, I say As salaamu alaikum (peace be upon you) many times a day. And so it was actually a greeting of respect from me. Not to worry, I will not send peace on you any longer.And I did understand the rest of post. Could you please explain it to me. Thankyou
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 10:10 AM • permalink#87 robf - I agree and disagree. Greater knowledge of the fundamentals of any religion is important if true acceptance and compromise is to take place. On the other hand, people’s views these days are largely shaped by what they see and hear - which is violence in the name of a religion they actually know little about. The concern for Muslims shouldn’t be about educating people on the theory of their religion…it should be to demonstrate that it is indeed as peaceful as it is claimed to be.
Anyway, gotta run and write pro-life feminist pamphlets (!), but thanks to all for an interesting thread. P2B - you should be proud of yourself for a great defence.
Posted by Black Chick on 2006 02 08 at 10:13 AM • permalinkPW, I have said that I do not condemn violence and you want me to condemn a person. You are not aware I think that for me to condemn them and then they aren’t is in my religion a major sin. That is why I say if he did it then he is condemned and if that isn’t good enough then I’m sorry. I would have no trouble going and saying to the world that he was condemned if I could be 100% certain.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 10:13 AM • permalinkJeffs, I haven’t been banned for a simple reason. I have not broken any of the rules of the thread.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 10:15 AM • permalinkI can’t believe I’m saying this but I think you had made up your mind about P2B early on - not much point in debating then, except perhaps to spew?
I was holding out for the disconnect between what I’d consider the moderate position and the positions she was taking to be the result of mutual misunderstanding.
But then she answered those questions. Now, answering them is to her credit, and I appreciate the candor with which she answered them, but refusing to label the following groups as terrorist is, IMHO, revealing:
Abu Sayyaf, Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya, Groupe islamique armée, Hamas, Harakat ul-Mujahidin, Hizbullah, Islamic Jihad, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, and Al-Qaeda
If you cannot label those groups as terrorist, then what definition are you operating under? Declaring distrust of the press as a reason is insufficient; even setting aside the tape of bin Laden copping to 9/11, al’Qaeda has long admitted involvement in the African embassy bombings, for example.
In regards to that tape, arguing that it could be fake is, IMHO, just as revealing. A truly moderate Muslim would have no problem describing those groups as terrorists, and wouldn’t resort to conspiracy theories to avoid the evidence.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 10:25 AM • permalinkPW I think you are probably right on the money. Unfortunately.
I have not read much that would give cause for optimism. The “moderates” are in denial and they will have their religion pulled out from beneath them before they realise it by a tougher more focussed breed. Minority or not. They simply cannot see what is in front of their noses and how dangerous it is especially for them.
There is no real resistance to the fascists as far as I can see. The “moderates” are still in to blaming the outside world for the problems of Islam. And everything else. Just like the fascists. Only a matter of degree. No real determination to face up to the threat within. That would take a lot of courage I suppose.
When the time comes the fascists will cut their throats like so many chickens. Pity. So many of them seem such nice people.
I said, “P2B is clearly not what any of us would consider a moderate Muslim.”
PW:
Obligatory devil’s advocate response: What if she is?
This goes back to something I mentioned on the other thread. It appears to be very easy to get Muslims to condemn hypothetical transgressors of Islam’s rules, but utterly impossible to get a condemnation of specific, real ones. Everything’s a matter of perspective, everything comes down to plausible deniability, nobody’s ever truly guilty of anything, nevermind if it requires the complete denial of objective reality.
Your point was reinfored in #95; the same game was played, again.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 10:33 AM • permalinkRob Crawford, the leaders of groups known (not suspected, there is a difference) to have committed attacks which killed civilians and where suicide operations were used, I condemn, and Islam condemns them as well. And if Al-Qaida has done such a thing, then I condemn them, I’m sorry I don’t know anything about the African Embassy bombings and my reluctance to condemn an individual is explained in #95.
And so I will condemn their actions. The group is a little different though because the leaders decisions are not always indicative of the followers ideas. It’s like Iraqi’s hating all Australians because our government chose to send troops there, whilke many people don’t agree.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 10:34 AM • permalinkgeoff on the contrary, the moderates are the ones that are blaming the muslims we know we need to change ourselves. Allah said “Allahwill not change the condition of a people until they change what is within themselves”.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 10:37 AM • permalinkAnd there is resistance, in educating the youth, and in holdong conferences among the muslims. All of this is happening. Just because it is non violent and not in the press does not mean it is non existant.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 10:39 AM • permalinkNo it’s not hypothetical condemnation, I condemn suicide bombings. They are not hypothetical, they happen every day. And I condemn them.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 10:42 AM • permalinkRob Crawford, the leaders of groups known (not suspected, there is a difference) to have committed attacks which killed civilians and where suicide operations were used, I condemn, and Islam condemns them as well.
Oh, just the leaders warrant your condemnation? And only if “known”—however you’ll end up defining that.
And if Al-Qaida has done such a thing, then I condemn them, I’m sorry I don’t know anything about the African Embassy bombings and my reluctance to condemn an individual is explained in #95.
If they’ve done it?
And, again, the retreat to a need for absolute knowledge—when we’ve already seen you’ll deny the evidence when it’s presented to you.
And so I will condemn their actions. The group is a little different though because the leaders decisions are not always indicative of the followers ideas.
People who hared off to Afghanistan to join al’Qaeda knew just what they were getting into. People who join Hizbullah know what they’re signing on to do. They don’t join those organizations ignorant of the positions the leaders take and the actions they order; they join them because of them.
Your argument is like my saying I refuse to condemn the KKK because of the actions of a few members; after all, not all of the members share their ideas. Would anyone buy it?
I certainly hope not.
Again, I do appreciate your candor. It’s quite enlightening.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 10:51 AM • permalinkYou are not aware I think that for me to condemn them and then they aren’t is in my religion a major sin.
Two alternative conclusions can be drawn from this:
a) Your weighing of the objective evidence leads you to the conclusion that it cannot reasonably be ascertained that bin Laden masterminded the 9/11 attacks (despite him claiming responsibility), and that the groups listed in Angela’s (rather, Daniel Pipes’) question #2 above are engaged in terrorist activities (despite them claiming responsibility), OR
b) you are coming to this conclusion because the only entity that can ascertain such a thing to your satisfaction would be the revealed word of your God.
I’m not sure which one of these possibilities I should feel more distressed by. Probably the latter, because it would indicate you’re fundamentally incapable of any independent thought (which I’d find rather scary) if the final result might possibly contradict what you’ve learned by rote.
I have said that I do not [sic] condemn violence and you want me to condemn a person.
No, I want you (and Muslims at large, really) to condemn the specific actions of specific people who have been shown to be responsible for exactly those specific actions. Instead, all that (almost) ever happens are wishy-washy denunciations of “violence” as a whole, or “those who may be responsible”. Heaven help us if a Muslim ever be caught pointing their finger at another Muslim (and be witnessed in that by a non-Muslim).
If your taking a stand against terrorists and other beasts takes the shape of what Christians might call “love the sinner, hate the sin”, fine. But loving the sinner does not (or at least should not) mean that the sinner never gets identified and never gets censured by the community. Nevertheless, right now that’s exactly where things are at, viz. your own disbelief at the responsibility of bin Laden for 9/11, and thus your personal reluctance to hold the man responsible for his deeds, if only in words.
I can certainly understand the inwardly-protective nature of Islam, but that means that Muslims need to start policing their own all the more (“God will sort them out in the afterlife” simply doesn’t cut it in modern society), because us infidels obviously can’t do that job, short of subjugating or eliminating all Muslims in the course of a new Crusade - which would be an outcome that nobody wants, for obvious reasons. Yet, that’s exactly what will inevitably happen, unless the Muslim faith begins to purge and marginalize those deviant elements from within. Right now, this simply isn’t happening yet to any appreciable degree, the occasional pro-freedom or anti-terrorism demonstration notwithstanding.
So, p2b, how do you feel about Osama bin Laden, personally? Is he good, or evil?
I still think part of the problem is that a Muslim, by definition, cannot be trusted when speaking to a non-Muslim. They’re given explicit permission to lie about their faith, after all.
I know I’m delving deep into conspiracy-theory territory here, but what if all Muslims feel the same, but only a few actually show otherwise, and only when necessary? All they need is to show a little outrage every time an atrocity occurs, then we’re obliged to remember their dissent the next time something happens. “Well, they’re not all like that. Some of them are very brave, standing up to the rest.”
P2B, if you’re serious about some of the stuff you’ve said, I think you need to quit wasting your time trying to convert us and telling us how good we’ll have it under sharia, and start working on your fellow believers. I admit, I’ve got my mind pretty much set on how I feel about Islam, and one website and one random poster on a blog isn’t going to change it. True reform, however…
Rob Crawford, have you ever thought that maybe they joined them because they were the closest party to their ideas.
And you seem very keen for me to pin a persons name. I will not. On the day of judgement when god asks me why I passed judgement on another of his slaves without knowledge, I don’t think saying “Rob crawford wanted me to” will surfice.
Don’t worry, the time will come when people will see that Islam is not about people strapping on bombs and blowing themselves up.
I condemn terrorism and everyone who knows me knows it. I have even fought with Muslims over it. So whether you chose to take my word or not is up to you.
Peace.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 10:59 AM • permalinksuellen, for your information I do.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 11:00 AM • permalinkdavid I am not here to convert anyone.. lol the idea amuses me. If I was going to try and convert someone I’d start with the people I love. ie my extended family.
And I do not lie to Muslim or not Muslim alike. And as far as I know a Muslim is not allowed to lie to anyone exceot to the enemy in warfare. And as far as I know we are not engaging in war and neither are you the enemy.
And I don’t know how many times I’ve said that I do work with “my fellow believers”..
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 11:07 AM • permalinkThere is no real resistance to the fascists as far as I can see. The “moderates” are still in to blaming the outside world for the problems of Islam. And everything else. Just like the fascists. Only a matter of degree. No real determination to face up to the threat within. That would take a lot of courage I suppose.
When the time comes the fascists will cut their throats like so many chickens. Pity. So many of them seem such nice people.
Not to hijack the thread, but yes, this whole conversation is rather illustrative of how even well-meaning people will unwittingly promote their own destruction. Post-1933 Europe has nothing on today.
(Heck, at least it’s not primarily us Germans again. *weak grin*)
suellen, if you don’t wish to believe me,that is up to you. I do my school work via corresspondance because it frees my time for other things, such as debating with other people, and showing people what Islam really is, Muslim and non-Muslim. I’ll have you know, that apart from school I am also doing two other courses of study. So that shows that the human can accomplish alot. Time used efficiently accomplishes alot.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 11:10 AM • permalinkP2b makes a good case for the laws of Islam being relatively benign.
Has anybody told the Muslims? Seems like now would be the time.
She ought to read a bit of history. Even the nice Germans died by the millions when the folks whom they either ignored or insisted were not true Germans got control.
The non-Muslims who kill and oppress, insisting they are purer Muslims than P2b, are going to start a blowback that is going to kill P2b and her family and a good many more.She also said she would not fight Muslims. Even if they were wrong, or invading Australiak, or massacring people as in Darfur. Being Muslim trumps a good deal, but we already knew that.
PW, I go by neither. It is just that with so much twisting of viewpoint in the media today, I will not condemn someone on that basis. And Al-Qaida or any other group is not going to be condemned via revelation. It stopped 1400 yrs ago. I am capable of individual thought, but I am not capable of condemning someone I never met or know anything sure about.
I have said many times, if OBL sanctions the killing of innocents then me and him do not agree. Whether or not he did it or not is not the point, because if I witness it, then I will condemn it, but until such a day as a am sure I will not say anything about anyone.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 11:15 AM • permalinkaubrey, you under estimate me. I don’t believe I am at any risk of being killed by any Muslim. And I certainly don’t think any Muslims are going to attack Australia.. Let them regain their own land first, before sending them on imaginary journeys to other places.
And no I wouldn’t raise a weapon againt a muslim, I would use words.
And no prophecies of our say that the more moderate ones like me will establish the Khalifate, ones that follow Islam according to how it was revealed.
So I don’t think people like me will be massacred. I think it will be the extremists, and those people that are too afraid to stand up for what they believe.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 11:22 AM • permalinkRob Crawford, have you ever thought that maybe they joined them because they were the closest party to their ideas.
Yes, that’s exactly my point.
They joined organizations that commit terrorist acts because they support those acts. I have no doubt they also support the ends those acts are intended to achieve, but, using an American example, it was possible to oppose the Vietnam War without joining the Weathermen.
And you seem very keen for me to pin a persons name. I will not. On the day of judgement when god asks me why I passed judgement on another of his slaves without knowledge, I don’t think saying “Rob crawford wanted me to” will surfice.
How about “because the evidence I had, including the person’s own words and deeds, pointed to their guilt”? If you cannot make the judgement based on that, then why does Islam have a legal code?
Don’t worry, the time will come when people will see that Islam is not about people strapping on bombs and blowing themselves up.
Not if Muslims don’t do something about it.
I condemn terrorism and everyone who knows me knows it. I have even fought with Muslims over it. So whether you chose to take my word or not is up to you.
Condemning terrorism without condemning terrorists, without condemning those who support terrorism, is meaningless. Insisting on absolute certainty while denying the evidence is intellectually dishonest, and leads people to wonder about the honesty of the condemnation.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 11:36 AM • permalinkaubrey, you under estimate me. I don’t believe I am at any risk of being killed by any Muslim. And I certainly don’t think any Muslims are going to attack Australia.. Let them regain their own land first, before sending them on imaginary journeys to other places.
Muslims planning attacks on Australians, in Australia, have already been arrested.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 11:40 AM • permalinkWhy? Because I’m muslim and me and my fellow muslims were offended. Why? Because I know people in other countries that saw them. Why because simply no one has denied it. Osama Bin Ladens own family don’t believe he did the attacks.. his family should know. And lastly, I have said I DONT CONDONE TERRORISM, BUT I AM NOT GOING TO SLANDER A MUSLIM FOR WHAT THEY MIGHT HAVE DONE. IF THEY DID IT THEN THEY ARE WRONG AND WAIT TILL SOMEONE GETS THERE HANDS ON THEM.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 11:41 AM • permalinkYeah they are innocent until proven guilty. I thought that was the law here… It’s funny how with Muslims your guilty until proven innocent.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 11:43 AM • permalinkHaha, because how could he ever get a fair trial after all that has been said about him.. anyone notice how for the first two yrs after 9/11 it was suspected terrorist obl, now its just terrorist, because we are used to it.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 11:53 AM • permalinkHoly crap! If this gal is “moderate Islam” then “Houston, we have a problem.” The face of modern Islam must be, based on P2B, acquiesence to violence, subjugation of women, subjugation of non-believers, restrictions of freedom of the press, moral relativism and on and on. I’m sorry, my Aussie friends, but better thee than me. I’ll support you dudes to the end but I’m glad this gal is yours and not ours. Brrr. It gives me the chills.
Posted by Kathy from Austin on 2006 02 08 at 11:55 AM • permalinkHow do you know that none of the cartoon authors/publishers were Muslim? And hence how do you know you aren’t condemning a fellow Muslim?
Bin Laden claimed responsiblity for 9/11 and threatened additional attacks on video tape. If the tape was faked by the evil Jews then all he has to do is state that and it will be all over Al-Jazeera in a matter of minutes.
But he doesn’t. Because he made the tape in the first place, because he believes he is fighting the good fight for Islam and that killing thousands of civilians is a good thing.
He is evil incarnate - and that you can’t state that shows where your beliefs actually lie.
Way back in 1997 he stated: “We declared jihad against the U.S. government, because the U.S. government is unjust, criminal, and tyrannical”. Do you agree with that? Can you condemn him for it? Is such a jihad justified
Kathy, you do realize we in the US have our own share of people with this mindset, don’t you?
It has been a worthwhile exchange, though. Thank you for your time and honesty, P2B.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 12:04 PM • permalinkacquiesence to violence, subjugation of women, subjugation of non-believers, restrictions of freedom of the press, moral relativism
Kathy, I don’t know where you got this from, because I’m the exact opposite. :D
Sam if a Muslim said something to mock Muhammad (pbuh) it would nullify their Islam. :D so I’m not going to be in that situation.
As for this whole round and round OBL discussion, I said i condemn him if he did it, but I am not sure, so from this you can believe I condemn him because you believe he did. So really, what is your problem?
So suellen take it that I condemn him if you believe he did.Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 12:06 PM • permalinkYeah they are innocent until proven guilty. I thought that was the law here…
I believe the standard is “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt”—not “guilty enough to convince even a Mafia wife”.
Posted by Paul Zrimsek on 2006 02 08 at 12:07 PM • permalinkAnd if you all think I’m a fanatic then thnk of this and go away and have nightmares, because I’m moderate. There are people out there that hate people for not being Muslim, and want to kill them all.
Far from agreeing or condoning these acts, I condemn them. Acts of terror against civilians are not allowed full stop. As well as suicide operations.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 12:12 PM • permalinkIf you want to make it like Muslims believe in blowing things up, then by all means go ahead, just don’t do it under the name of Islam. It is hopeless to argue with you when 1 I’m tired and all I want is to go to sleep, and 2 You are intent on believing that Muslims condone terrorism.
So I think I’ll be sensible and go off to sleep.
Don’t worry I’ll be back tomorrow Insha Allah.
Peace.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 12:18 PM • permalinkBut are there truly civilians—from a Muslim standpoint—in a situation such as this?
Protesters are demanding that the Danish government “do something” about the cartoons, even though no laws were broken. By issuing sanctions against entire countries, they are effectively trying to punish those who have no control over the actions of a few. Their inaction, in the protester’s eyes, makes them as culpable as the artists and publishers.
As far as Osama bin Laden is concerned, it’s irrelevant to our point whether or not he directly ordered the attacks on September 11. The 19 hijackers were Muslim, they attacked what we consider civilians, and I haven’t seen you condemn them yet…
David civialians are all people who are not engaged in the war.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 12:24 PM • permalink#129, Rob, I know it. But as I continued reading this thread a growing sense of unease has set in. Far from what I think she is trying to accomplish, this Muslim woman is chilling to me. If this is in fact “moderate” Islam (and we can surely debate if that is an oxymoron) then I believe that there will, in the end, be a cleansing in the West. I hate to say it, and those who have seen me post here before know that I am pretty middle of the road, but things are becoming much more crystal clear to me, and perhaps should have before. P2B: perhaps your time is better spent trying to moderate the views (?!) of your co-religionists rather than fanning the flames here and confirming our darkest fears. Sorry folks, had to say it.
Posted by Kathy from Austin on 2006 02 08 at 12:28 PM • permalink#90, PW, I’m afraid I have to agree with you.
I believe p2bmuslimah is a gentle young girl who has been raised in a loving environment and taught all the right values of her religion, and largely protected from ugly reality. And she wishes to go out and spread the peace and love around. This makes her equivalent to our own lefty, peace-loving tree-huggers who go to Iraq to become human shields (until things get nasty), or who would confront violent thugs with words of peace and harmony (just before they get cut down, as several have already). It’s all very sweet and nice, and utterly ineffective in the face of fascism and thuggery, which is what Islam, right or wrong, has become to too many.
Nevertheless, she has been forthright in defending her religion, and has met every objection with calm and reason (if also with a bit of equivocation).
It’s all very nice and squishy, but totally unrealistic in today’s world. The ugly fact is, Islam has been hijacked in the perception of the rest of the world by a bunch of murdering fanatics. Until Muslims stand up in vast numbers and say that this will not endure, and then make it stick, everybody else is going to be distrustul and frightened of Islam. Nice, peaceful words don’t cut the mustard.
The problem I’m having with p2b’s words is this:
It [Islam] believes in the religious leaders choosing the most appropriate person for the job.
In the West, particularly in the Anglosphere, we do not believe in leaving our fates up to a group of religious leaders (or princes, or members of a particular family) to pick our leaders for us. We like to do that ourselves, having weighed our options. Sometimes we make mistakes, sometimes we don’t, but whatever happens is our own responsibility, and our system of government allows us to correct mistakes. Sharia, as you understand it, is rigid and incapable of making mistakes, and so no correction would ever be allowed. That’s why none of us ever want to live under it.
And Lydia, what made you shudder? The fact that I’m God conscious and believe in judgement day? Or the fact that you haven’t prepared for it? Or was it the fact that all Muslims consider themsleves to be slaves of God that bothered you.??
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 12:30 PM • permalinkanyone notice how for the first two yrs after 9/11 it was suspected terrorist obl, now its just terrorist, because we are used to it.
Actually, it has been “confirmed terrorist” since back in the 1990s. If you’re under the belief that any of this started with 9/11, you’re mistaken. And pre-Al Qaida Islamic-based terrorism goes all the way back to the 1970s.
It is just that with so much twisting of viewpoint in the media today, I will not condemn someone on that basis.
Then go and seek out the truth. It’s staring you and everybody else in the face, assuming you truly want to know it. Throwing your hands up in resignation and crying out “I just can’t trust the media!” won’t get you anywhere with us - we all realized that long ago, which is why we’re all pretty well versed in independent inquiry and in drawing our own (well-grounded, if necessarily imperfect) conclusions.
Your opinion, on the other hand, seems to be, “if there’s no completely authoritative source that says something about X, we can never know the ‘true’ nature of X, so it’s not worth trying to find out anything about X”. No wonder Muslims and the scientific method don’t seem to mix well.
I realize you’re still young, but let’s give you a headstart on it: Intellectual curiosity is a good thing. But it entails being ready for disappointment. Many times, inquiring into a subject will lead you to confirm what you already knew, which is good because your efforts nevertheless gave you a deeper understanding of the subject. Other times, it will lead you to a conclusion that is completely different from what you may have thought before. That’s difficult to deal with sometimes, but unless you are a slave to your beliefs, it will make you stronger.
You seem to be bright enough for that level of intellectual curiosity, so perhaps a good place to start would be the “Why do so many people commit atrocities in the name of Islam today?” question that has been thrown at you probably 20 times by now. No, “because they’re not real Muslims” is not a sufficient answer, it’s merely the “No true Scotsman” fallacy writ large. Defining the problem away doesn’t help anybody, except the extremists.
The overwhelming majority of the commenters here doesn’t think that Islam itself is the whole problem. Nevertheless, there’s no denying that Islam is more than just coincidentally involved with the problem. Deploring the violence is a good start (though obviously incomplete in my opinion, as I’ve stated before), but understanding the context is what you truly have to look for. And the context is not simply a) Jews, b) the Iraq War, c) non-Muslim dislike of Islam, d) centuries-old injustices that were done in the name of other religions, or e) any other blame-shifting excuses that Muslim spokesmen like to come up with.
Proud2be, we’ve let you take over what, three comment threads now? because you were fairly polite and at least seem to be willing to use arguments as opposed to threatening people with violence as so many of your religious compatriots do. But I have read more than one commenter who has expressed irritation at the way you’ve dominated these conversations, and as it’s against the rules of civilized behavior to let a child dominate the conversation of adults, and as you keep on defending that Bin Laden creature instead of acknowledging that he has already admitted to the murder of thousands of my people, I am putting an end to this now. In the place of your parents (if you are, as you keep claiming, a mere high school girl), who are either unaware of or don’t care what you are doing with your time, I am telling you now to get off the computer and get back to your school work. If I see one more peep out of you on this blog for the rest of the day I will ban you.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 02 08 at 12:30 PM • permalinkThe problem is that you just can’t pull the trigger and say that Bin Laden is evil. You have to keep hedging your bets.
But there are only two possibilities:
1. He was behind 9/11.
2. He wasn’t behind 9/11, but doesn’t mind people thinking he was and certainly supports the act itself.
Both possibilities result in the same conclusion: he is an evil madman.
He claims to be fighting for Islam, so he does/supports these acts in the name of Islam. I would expect a Muslim to condemn him not just for the acts but for wrapping them up their religion as well.
I know Christians condemn people who cloak their evil in Christianity.
But Muslim’s such as yourself just don’t. They stick to hypotheticals and refuse to actually condemn him and his actions. Which of course raises the question of why? Do they actually support them? Do they think it’s reasonable/justifiable in some way?
You also haven’t commented on the Bin Laden quote I gave above. Do you agree with his Jihad? Can you condemn it?
Well RebeccaH, the muslims are content with it. Because our leaders are people with secular and religous knowledge, and they are trusted to choose the most appropriate person. A muslim state, unlike a western one, is not run on your opinion or my opinion. It’s run on what is believed to be God’s opinion.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 12:34 PM • permalinkand andrea I never saw that. So sorry, Im off to bed anyway. And i just wish you didn’t only take the few comments of bother, but all off them together.
Peace
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 08 at 12:38 PM • permalinkAndrea, I’m mindful of the thread-hijacking, but I do think these threads have been quite interesting and edifying, though perhaps not in the way originally intended by our new friend. This is Tim’s blog obviously, but perhaps an open thread if there’s a lull in the news sometime soon might be possible?
A muslim state, unlike a western one, is not run on your opinion or my opinion. It’s run on what is believed to be God’s opinion.
I’m with Lydia: *SHUDDER*
The God I love and trust is loving enough of his people to allow them to form and act upon their own opinions—like any healthy, loving parent does for his children.
p24@submissive
I do not deny that many attacks have been perpetrated by people claiming themselves to be muslim, under the name of Islam.
So is it the media’s job to tell us that these perpetrators are only pretending to be Muslim? And if so, would any of the perpetrators involved actually support that story? No, because those rioters AND their cheerleaders ARE Muslims. If you doubt it, just ask them.
p2b@ 20
would you actually believe that some people do see Muslim as synonomous with terrorist.
Including every single recent terrorist in Iraq, London, Spain, Bali, Bali again, etc etc. Somebody forgot to tell THEM how peaceable and lovey their religion is. Maybe you’d like to tell them?
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 08 at 12:55 PM • permalinkWhether there will be an open thread post, that is.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 02 08 at 12:55 PM • permalinkYeah, yeah, proud2be, you aren’t insulting troll (although defending a bloody handed murderer is not a positive thing in my eyes).
However, I just counted 54 comments by you on this thread alone….out of 147 comments. You are dominating the threads here. PW may enjoy a chat with you, and that’s fine, within the blog rules.
But if you dominated the conversation like this at the dinner table in my house, you’d eat dinner alone in the basement. Perhaps you’re an only a child (and I have my doubts about that), but, if so, you are a persistently rude child.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 02 08 at 12:57 PM • permalinkProud2Be, on an earlier thread, when you were a much less literate and articulate person than you are now (and praise be to Allah for that because there is no way that the Victorian Public School system could achieve such miracles in just one day) you told me that you wouldn’t accept my comments on your chosen Western defenders of Islam and its self-chosen prophet, in which I pointed out the untruth and the silliness of your quotations of their assertions of the merits of Islam and its self-chosen Prophet. You will recall: Thomas Carlyle, the Nobel Prize Winner who died 20 years before the Nobel Prize was instituted, Gustav Weil who tried to explain Muhammad’s divine revelations as the product of epileptic fits and Annie Besant, who despite her kind words about your prophet, thought her adopted son was a reincarnation of the Buddha.
You will also recall that you said that you would investigate my claims, and that I encouraged you to do so.
Well, what is the product of your research? Or are you not a person interested in the truth of what you say (for all my claims are easily verifiable) or are you just a parrot for what you have been told without caring whether it is true or not?
I look forward to hearing from you.
p2b@slaveygirl
slavery to God is not in the same context as slavery to human beings,
Hey honey, slavery is slavery. Slavery that you’re proud of is no different from or better than slavery that you are ashamed of. Slavery to invisible magical superbeings is not different in any way from slavery to the visible audible mortal persons who TELL YOU they are speaking on behalf of such invisible beings. So when I call you a slave, with the intention of insulting you, and you are not even insulted to be called a slave, I guess we break even. Except for you still being a slave, I mean.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 08 at 01:21 PM • permalinkCruella 141
If I see one more peep out of you on this blog for the rest of the day I will ban you.
Aw c’mon! I haven’t had a chew-toy this tasty in ages!
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 08 at 01:28 PM • permalinkTempo,
You will also recall that you said that you would investigate my claims, and that I encouraged you to do so.
Well, what is the product of your research? Or are you not a person interested in the truth of what you say (for all my claims are easily verifiable) or are you just a parrot for what you have been told without caring whether it is true or not?
I look forward to hearing from you.
Now, now… that would only interfere with her rhetoric. We can’t have that!
Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 02 08 at 01:34 PM • permalinkBut if you dominated the conversation like this at the dinner table in my house
Though, at a dinner table you wouldn’t get nearly as much of a combined output from the rest of us either, what with it being somewhat non-conducive to the conversation if 20 people argue for the same point at the same time. No such limits here on the Intarweb, for better or for worse.
Hmm, I didn’t make the point I was trying to make, d’oh. So let’s try again: What I mean is that we’re pretty much all to blame for the snowballing effect on these recent threads, it just distributes differently on the two sides of the argument.
I’m quite in awe of her response times though, I’ve got to say that. Well, one advantage of having all the answers ready-made by The Book, I guess.
Hello,
I just found it interesting that fox censoring someone is actual news at all! I just came back from living in America and let me say this much, there is no such thing as free speech in America, it is almost as censored as the Muslim country that i grew up in. I could accept the censorship where i grew up because as a dictatorship its quite obvious, it sucks but at least they admit that they are censoring everything. However in America this is all they talk about but at the end of the day if you express an opionion thats not right wing republican you will be unheard, fired from your job or at the very least ridiculed and cut off. The Bush admin is extremely dangerous, it is reversing all the progress that came with the democratic government before it. This is why we in Europe must stand up for freedom of speech and the right to print what we want. I thought the cartoon about ‘running out of virgins’ was humourous! however the rest were fairly crap, but thats besides the point. We cannot censor ourselves in order to appease Muslims prone to blowing themselves up in our cities. The fact is that if we do then we are all going down the path of fox news and there fore we are left with nothing. I have many Muslim friends but i have never asked them any questions about the religion i grew up surrounded by simply because i was scared. The whole of Europe is now scared, especially the Brits though, they have serious problems there. More importantly the Muslims are more scared, many muslims im sure want to question their religion but they cant because they will be ostrasised from their families and friends. I know this because many of my friends are ‘muslim’ but dont know why, and dont know what they believe in. This blind faith is the problem. Muslims cannot think for themselves, everything revolves around praying 5 times a day and this and that. The amount of things my friends were forced into growing up, koranic studies etc, reading arabic…they hated it all, and this is in a Muslim country. These people on the telly buring flags are uneducated MEN who love islam simply because it allows them to control everything around them. Obviously there is a certain amount of brainwashing involved with the women but i also believe there are so many women in the muslim world that would love to get away from islam aswell. It a very hard topic to discuss, even having grown up in the muslim world i still have a very hard time coming to grips with trying to understand such intolerance. Why is it that every other ethnic minority in England managed to slip into British culture etc. relatively ok whilst the Muslims never did?proud2be -
If you’re not already banned…
“And James, my ettiquette is a result of my Isalm.”
Well, my etiquette towards yourself is attributable to the fact that I’m a reasonable person and I want to hear your point of view, and I hope you’ll listen to mine. I was complimenting you because you didn’t spiral down into a tit-for-tat war with some of the more strident sources of opinion amongst the commentariat.
I will say, however, that you didn’t really answer my questions at all. You went part of the way to answering the first question, but you completely ignored the second - which kind of devalued your answer to the first. And you didn’t touch the third. You seemed to say that the children of Muslim new Muslim immigrants react in such a way in a new country (like Australia) and need to be educated as to what Muslim values are. Trouble is, many new cultures have made their way to Australia and their (now Australian) children not reacted in such a way. What is so special about Islam? Please consider question two when answering question one. Also, why are many of the terrorists - take the 9/11 bombers, for example - not fitting into that category, and are in fact children born and bred in so-called Islamic regimes?
Anyway, here are my questions again :
What do you think it is about your faith that drives a small (but significant) proportion of its followers to commit atrocities against the rest of humanity, in the name of Allah?
Why don’t members of other faiths act in such ways (or, what is it you think is special about Islam that makes some Muslim individuals act this way)?
What can be done to stop this cancer that’s growing within the Islamic movement?
Posted by James Waterton on 2006 02 08 at 02:10 PM • permalinkI just found it interesting that fox censoring someone is actual news at all! I just came back from living in America and let me say this much, there is no such thing as free speech in America, it is almost as censored as the Muslim country that i grew up in…. However in America this is all they talk about but at the end of the day if you express an opionion thats not right wing republican you will be unheard, fired from your job or at the very least ridiculed and cut off.
Uh-huh. Pull the other one, it’s got bells on it.
I live here, Akim, and I’ve never heard of anyone being fired for expressing a contrary opinion. Hell, one of my brothers is a moonbat, and I know he’s never been fired for his opinions, and the ridiculing he gets is no different than the ridiculing my other (sensible) brother gets.
You’re quite simply full of it, even if I agree with you on the cartoon position.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 02:19 PM • permalinkHowever in America this is all they talk about but at the end of the day if you express an opionion thats not right wing republican you will be unheard, fired from your job or at the very least ridiculed and cut off.
What a note-perfect reprisal of the “that evil right-wing media” meme that p2b started with in #2. How ironic that the rest of the post is the exact opposite. BDS truly does bring together the most disparate groups…
in America this is all they talk about but at the end of the day if you express an opionion thats not right wing republican you will be unheard, fired from your job or at the very least ridiculed and cut off.
That’s pretty rich. Here in Austin, Tejas, being suspected of a right-wing opinion is just about enough to get you excluded from polite society. A bumper sticker gets your car keyed.
The Bush admin is extremely dangerous, it is reversing all the progress that came with the democratic government before it.
What progress would that be, exactly? Bombing medicine factories to get the press’ mind off Bubba’s infidelities?
Guys,
the post wasnt supposed to be Anti American, i was just trying to illustrate what happens when a supposedly free country caves into political correctness etc. As far as fox being republican station and people being fired for expressing their opinions you can check it out on this website. So as you can see Rob, im not full of it. As for progress made by the Clinton Admin, try foreign relations for a start. Lets admit it, most non americans dont particularly like Americans but during the clinton admin America had never been more popular on the world stage. As far as trying to express an opinion on the television in America, if its not vetted by the powers that be you will be cut off and ridiculed, ive seen Bill O Reilly do this a million times, simply because he cant argue the point properly. As for Austin, as far as i know its the only city in Texas that has a democratic majority, obviously keying cars is not a good idea but i bet it wouldnt happen in any other texan city! Listen guys i have many American friends and I enjoyed my time there, im not trying to put america down or anything. As someone who has lived in America (for over 5 years) and Europe i can just see that we have more freedoms here. We are not so entwined with this PCness that America has created. Although England is getting there! Well there is your evidence anyway about the firings etc. so i dunno what else to say really. I know patriotism is big in america and that but everyone should be open to critisism. i wasnt really expecting replies from Americans to be honest! To the other non americans reading this, the reaction they took to my critisism shows how in a country with censored media people dont know what is going on around them, do we want that in Europe or Australia?As far as fox being republican station and people being fired for expressing their opinions you can check it out on this website. So as you can see Rob, im not full of it.
You are full of it. That page says nothing about people being fired for expressing their opinions. It mentions that a Fox affiliate fired a couple of reporters “over a dispute involving their reporting”—but doesn’t detail the dispute—and that Fox doesn’t deal with reporters the company feels treats them unfairly. The rest is from the site’s political perspective—and doesn’t support your claim about people losing their jobs.
You are so full of it, I can smell it from here.
Lets admit it, most non americans dont particularly like Americans but during the clinton admin America had never been more popular on the world stage.
So popular people were coming here to murder 3,000 of us! And Bush is so horrible that just eight months after he took office, Muslims the world over celebrated those murders!
Pfeh. Clinton was popular. America was as hated as ever.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 03:45 PM • permalinkGuys i was just thinking of the whole dixie chicks fiasco
Talk about not being able to express an opionion without being bullied!? What about the fact that the 800m people watching the Stones at the superbowl only got to hear one song uncensored? Why book a band when you are going to censor all of their songs but one?I hadn’t really noticed this part:
i wasnt really expecting replies from Americans to be honest! To the other non americans reading this, the reaction they took to my critisism…
Well, eff you very much, too. The reaction to your claims was to ask for evidence. And your reaction is to accuse us of lying.
Charming.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 03:49 PM • permalinkGuys i was just thinking of the whole dixie chicks fiasco
Odd. They weren’t fired. People stopped listening to them and demonstrated their displeasure by destroying their copies of Dixie Chicks CDs. But they weren’t fired.
And, really, that doesn’t support your claim at all.
What about the fact that the 800m people watching the Stones at the superbowl only got to hear one song uncensored? Why book a band when you are going to censor all of their songs but one?
You do realize that bleeping a Stones song during the Super Bowl isn’t about political speech, don’t you?
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 03:52 PM • permalinkI can smell the smoke from the British Embassy thirty blocks away.
Posted by chinesearithmetic on 2006 02 08 at 04:01 PM • permalinkThe US government never banned the Dixie Chicks or the Sex Pistols.
The group’s second single, released by Virgin on May 27, 1977 was God Save the Queen, a stinging attack on the British Royal Family, and by extension the institutions of Britain, delivered in Rotten’s trademark sneer. Coming at a time when deference to royalty was still a predominant trait in both the establishment and the country as a whole the record was quickly banned from airplay by the staid BBC, whose Radio 1 dominated music broadcasting at the time.
The BBC is funded by the English government.
Nevertheless, in the week of Queen Elizabeth II’s Silver Jubilee, the record officially reached number two in some UK charts (although the number-two spot was, tellingly, left blank in several listings, and many believe, with evidence, that the record actually reached number one, and that the charts were rigged to prevent such a spectacle).
We can play this game forever.
America (peace be upon her)
Bruce, Europe is barely hanging on to the freedom of speech, if you read what i wrote it says “We are not so entwined with this PCness that America has created”. It doesnt say that we are not PC. We are, and thats part of the problem, however its not to the ludicrous extent that the Americans are. Rob, I wouldnt say America was hated as much in the ninties. I mean you could travel abroad without everyone giving you hassle, i mean thats better that now. Youre right though, Clinton was a very popular man. Ok Rob, this is my last post cos this wasnt supposed to be about America at all. Im just talking about censorship and free speech, and the right to say what you want without being bullied, afterall they (dixie) were made to apologise for their personal opionions, im sure you can draw the connection yourself. I never accused you of lying all i implied was that youre uninformed, which you are, if you honestly think that fox is a non republican fair and balanced news station. No need to be so agressive.
Akim, condensed for your reading pleasure:
“America is insert_descriptive_term_here.”
“Well, I meant America is move_goalposts.”
“Actually, I meant America is move_them_a_bit_more.”
You’ve gone from people losing their jobs to the Dixie Chicks having possibly suffered a dip in their CD and concert sales. That’s not even the same ballpark.
...if you honestly think that fox is a non republican fair and balanced news station…
Um… Compared to the Communist News Network and Dan Rather’s attempts to subvert a presidential election, I’d say they’re pretty fair and balanced, myself.
We all know they tilt a little to the right; no one here claims otherwise. Come back when they confess to hiding evidence of atrocities committed by foreign government, or when they actively promote known forged documents as authentic.
fair enough, I cant find the link to the fired anchor story, but that was one of many points made. The dixie chicks thing wasnt supposed to support a fired journalist claim, it was merely illustrating what happens when you speak out against the president in America. The country is brainwashed, why else would bush be able to cheat his way into the presidency and then actually get voted back in for a second term.
fox fabricating things….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1319075,00.htmlI’m so brainwashed I voted Democratic.
Posted by chinesearithmetic on 2006 02 08 at 04:25 PM • permalinkThe country is brainwashed, why else would bush be able to cheat his way into the presidency and then actually get voted back in for a second term.
Who, exactly, is brainwashed?
But fox and the right wing media did a good job of nearly ruining them for expressing an anti-bush opinion, thats all im trying to say.
No, it’s not. You said people got fired for expressing an anti-Bush opinion, and implied it was common and widespread. You could’t back that up, so you waved vaguely in the direction of Fox, then fell back on the Dixie Chicks.
Fer crissake, you’ve been reduced to complaining that the side you don’t like expressed its displeasure. Considering the fanbase of the Dixie Chicks—a bluegrass band turned country band—it’s no surprise their fanbase didn’t appreciate their comments. It has less to do with “right wing media” than with idiot starlets who can’t keep their mouths shut and end up killing their own careers.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 04:34 PM • permalinkAkim, “Fox” didn’t fabricate anything. One of their political reporters engaged in sophomoric behavior and was reprimanded for it. I’m awaiting your goalpost-moving on this item.
Posted by Some0Seppo on 2006 02 08 at 04:37 PM • permalinkDon’t drag Morrissey into this, Rob.
Posted by chinesearithmetic on 2006 02 08 at 04:38 PM • permalinkHmmm P2b was still posting at (by my reckoning) 2:30 in the morning and had to be put to bed by Andrea.
I haven’t got high school age kids but i’d have thought parents would have something to say about that.
Mind you I am assuming she’s on the Eastern seaboard and doesn’t live in Perth.
Still I get the sense that our argument mostly isn’t with her. She seems to be of a very moderate flavour.
Akim:
1. Bush was elected by the largest majority in American history. Deal with it.
2. The Dixie Chicks were on foreign soil when they insulted our country and, not incidentally, their target demographic loves our country and supports our President. ‘Ya reap what ‘ya sow in the free market.
3. If you think American news outlets are propoganda tools of the right wing (or, maybe they are run by Jooooos) you have not been paying attention. Have you read a newspaper here lately?
4. I will give you the point on the gamma rays from Karl Rove alluded to in your comment. It has been said in this comment section several times by wronwright and mcenroe that they are agents for same. Beware!
5. Austin’s politics are developed around the University of Texas (50K students) and therefore is more blue than the rest of the state. But Kerry won even in Travis County by a slim majority. Obviously many Austinites lean right. Also, there are at least two posters on this blog that are under the “gamma ray” and we kind of like ourselves and our views.Lastly, I have a friend that I met once that was Muslim (just like you’ve met “a” nice American). Liked the guy a lot. That doesn’t mean they are all decent or indecent.
Damn I’m testy today.
Posted by Kathy from Austin on 2006 02 08 at 04:59 PM • permalinkEveryone who voted for that warmongering idiot who cant speak the english language is brainwashed.
listen mate, i cant find the article on the anchor who was fired for expressing anti bush remarks right. You win ok :) So get over that. Fox are right wing media, bottom line. We get fox here in Europe. A friend of mine is studying media and they were told in University to watch the fox news channel so they can see how americans distort the news on a daily basis, like only showing mental looking muslims protesting violently. Contrast that with Euronews and you will see the fuller picture, the mad protesters but also people protesting peacefully.
right so fox isnt responsible for whats published on their website. It wasnt foxes fault then eh, just one of their reports, silly me..
“idiot starlets who can’t keep their mouths shut and end up killing their own careers”
this is my point rob you should be able to say what you want about the president without the right wing media making a big deal out of it, or having to worry about it killing your career. This is exactly my point and you just said it yourself.Hence the ‘red’ americans are completely brainwashed by the right wing media and all this gratuitous flag flying and hyped up’support the troops’ patriotism. Cos if you are anti war you obviously hate the troops and want them all to die right? thats not the message fox sends is it?
Everyone who voted for that warmongering idiot
Let me guess. You believe 9/11 was an inside job, right? And the twin towers were really just bins filled with Jewish money.
who cant speak the english language
Careful, chum, glass houses and all.
is brainwashed.
But not you. You get your news from unbiased sources, like the Guardian.
Well, it’s not always that a first line eliminates the need to read the post, but yours certainly qualifies.
I think that if Akim isn’t proud2b@muslimah, then he at least is taking up where she left off, only with less class. Seems a little suspicious to me.
I’m more than suspicious about a guy who claims to have lived in America for five years and doesn’t know any more about the concept of free speech, free democratic elections, and the free exchange of ideas than Akim knows. Ignorant much?
One last point to be made with p2b, by the way:Well RebeccaH, the muslims are content with it. Because our leaders are people with secular and religous knowledge, and they are trusted to choose the most appropriate person. A muslim state, unlike a western one, is not run on your opinion or my opinion. It’s run on what is believed to be God’s opinion
Letting someone else choose your leaders is fine for Muslims in Muslim countries, if that’s what you want. What I (and I presume everyone else here) object to is the current trend of trying to enforce this system on non-Muslims countries. I repeat, we do not want sharia; sharia law contradicts our centuries-old culture and system of law; and we will not submit to it.
Kathy
Firstly i havent met ‘a’ nice American, ive met loads of nice Americans. Loads of my best mates are Americans right. Im not Anti American, i dont like your government very much thats all.
I take it from the Jewish comment you made, you think im muslim or something? I have no problem with Jews and im not Muslim, nor have i ever been Muslim. I used to be christian, but i gave that up.
im also well aware of the reason Austin is ‘blue’, had a mate who went to college there.
what gamma ray? how do you mean you like yourselves and your views, i thought we were supposed to be expressing different views and thats what this was about?
Akim, do you attribute Fox’s brainwashing powers to the charisma of Bill O’Reilly, the duende of Sean Hannity?
Posted by chinesearithmetic on 2006 02 08 at 05:21 PM • permalinkAnd loads of my best mates are American is the European update of Some of my best friends are colo(u)red.
Posted by chinesearithmetic on 2006 02 08 at 05:22 PM • permalinkGood Lord, That Fake, P2b, is back! This the third post she has hijacked, always getting off subject. She was unmasked several posts back by Francis H who commented: “I agree that Proud2 etc was a fake. The consciously corrupted spelling which immediately corrected when challenged, the sudden claim that she was a girl, the claim to be just a poor widdle high school student and the claim to be a 10th generation aussie. Sorry but unless your aboriginal that’s very unlikely; my forebears came out in the 1830s and i’’m still only 4th generation (and no i’m not that old).”
Moreover, P2b adds nothing to the illumination of facts because she is either delusional or a liar. Take one example, as expressed in several posts back, that P2b can’t pass judgement on a Muslim , and so cannot pass judgement on Osama. Moreover, P2b certainly can’t do it because “she never met him”. Most Christians have never met Hitler, but have no problem passing judgement. Oh, I forget, we read the wrong newspapers and see dubbed videos. It was the Zionists who produced 9/11. The tape containing Osama’s confession, why that was dubbed, and the news photos of Palestinians dancing in the streets on the West Bank and Gaza on news of 9/11, also dubbed, and the Arabs dancing in the streets of Brooklyn on that same day, before my very eyes, why my eyes also dubbed.After all, why consider the facts that are right in front of your veil? And when asked about the murder of the Catholic Priest in Turkey by one of her Muslim high school collegues, she answered “No Muslim would condone such an act”. Yet one did kill him. Figure that. And how about suicide bombings? According to P2b, No Muslim would condone that, either. Her response to my comment, “So, all those Hamas-Arafites suicide bombers must have been Zionists” was that Hamas has not produced a suicide bomber since 2001 and so, according to her, they are reformed. Dodge, Dodge, Dodge. If a fact is uncomfortable, say it’s not true, throw in a few selected verses from some relgious tome, or other, throw in few oily remarks about your lack of politenes and a piggy ending of “peace” and that is enough to erase the brutalities, the be-heading, the murders, rapes, kidnapping, child-sacrifice suicide bombings; the fact that from the Middle East, India, Phillipines, Iraq, and on and on, Muslims are creating outrages of the most vicious kind against the locals, be they Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Anamists,(oh, and the cartoonists) on and on, and finally against those few Muslims themselves if they don’t agree with the beasts within.Akim said - Im (sic) just talking about censorship and free speech, and the right to say what you want without being bullied”
Akim, free speech doesn’t mean freedom from being ridiculed for the expression of that speech. Either your argument holds weight in the marketplace of ideas or it doesn’t.
[i[The test of democracy is freedom of criticism. ~David Ben-Gurion
Posted by joe bagadonuts on 2006 02 08 at 05:31 PM • permalinki wasnt really expecting replies from Americans to be honest!
That was buried in one of “I like Americans, I really do, even though they are incredibly stupid and oppressed and everyone else in the world hates them because they didn’t elect a fat philanderer president-for-life and oh by the way they’re all liars” Akim’s earlier quotes. You know what, Akim? I’m glad you’re not living in my country anymore. I don’t know where you moved to, but stay the fuck there.
And oh by the way, for being a pointless insulting shit you are banned.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 02 08 at 05:32 PM • permalinkthis is my point rob you should be able to say what you want about the president without the right wing media making a big deal out of it, or having to worry about it killing your career. This is exactly my point and you just said it yourself.
*sigh*
The people who protested the Dixie Chicks were exercising their free speech, too. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean speech without consequences; it means the government will not prevent you from saying what you like and will protect you from violence from those who don’t like what you say.
Muslims boycotting Danish products are within their rights—stupid, but within their rights. It’s the violent reaction that stunned and angered the West.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 08 at 05:33 PM • permalink
Sorry. I thought that I had close the italicsPosted by joe bagadonuts on 2006 02 08 at 05:36 PM • permalink#179—why else would bush be able to cheat his way into the presidency and then actually get voted back in for a second term.—Akim
I dunno. Maybe because he’s right?
Posted by wronwright on 2006 02 08 at 05:46 PM • permalinkBy the way, as this amusing thread winds its way to a conclusion, let me recommend to you this interesting new article out of Iran, which sums up the estate of women under the Dar o’ Islam pretty well:
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5184
Just my take on P2B and her astounding graduation from sms txtng to full-blown taqqiya. I think she is what she says she is, and her father has taken over the helm because it got a bit too confronting.
Yes, muslim women and girls in this country can have a fair amount of freedom - that is because they are in this country. If she was in, say, Iran, Nigeria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, (insert muslim-majority country of choice), then there is no way possible that she would be able to sit and tap away with us on the blog. We are not family, and we are most definitely of more than one gender, so we are haraam.
I’m enjoying her posts, because this is the best way we can see taqqiya in action. This is better than Kaysar Trad or Sheikh Al-hilaly.
The extent to which critical faculties are atrophied under the continual onslaught of the OCD that is Islam is indeed depressing and frightening.
I’ve been racking my brains trying to figure out how we, as infidels, can ‘build a bridge’ and stave off the inevitable, but I can’t find a way.
We can talk all we like about education and tolerance and communication, but when one party persists in talking around in circles and not acknowledging that their opposite number may have a point, then we are in deep shite.
I hope P2B (or her dad) is allowed to keep posting, and providing us with much needed enlightenment.
Sort of like the old thing about work rules.
Rule 1. The boss is always right.
Rule 2. If the boss is wrong, see rule 1.In this case, it’s more like
Rule 1. All muslims are better than any infidels
Rule 2. If a muslim is a self-confessed murderer then see rule 1.Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 02 08 at 08:07 PM • permalinkCathy Young (pbuh) offers a nice retrospective on the salad days of US international popularity here.
Posted by Paul Zrimsek on 2006 02 08 at 09:10 PM • permalinkIf I had not come late to the party, I would have asked p2b one question: If a fellow Muslim told you that he was planning to commit a terrorist act, would you turn him in to the civil authorities? I don’t see a lot of wiggle room, but I’ll bet (s)he’d do plenty of wiggling nonetheless. I’m afraid I’m with the commenters who say if this is the moderate face of Islam, Allah help us. But then I’m probably not buying his/her schtick in the first place.
As for Malkin/Fox, didn’t see it, can’t judge it. I know I’ve seen at least one of the cartoons (big Mo and da bomb) on Brit Hume. And, although I like Malkin, at times she does not come off all that well on tv. Like in the fabled exchange with Mathews—she was less than impressive IMO.
Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 02 08 at 11:01 PM • permalink#211 “Yes, Muslim women and girls in this country can have a fair amount of freedom - that is because they are in this country. If she [P2B]was in, say, Iran, Nigeria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, (insert Muslim-majority country of choice), then there is no way possible that she would be able to sit and tap away with us on the blog.” So Right, Arbed. I lived in Iran for three years before the Shah was unseated. Even then women were given the short end. The Shah had outlawed the veil, but women wore the chador, holding the ends of the hood in their teeth so the face would be partially covered. For a more serious sad look at the fate of females in an Islamic state, please read “Reading Lolita in Tehran”. Chilling stuff. Turns out the Mullah class produces the main supply of pedophiles. (That is not the main point of the book nor the most serious crime of that society.)
The thread hijacker known as proud2 is demonstrably a fake, and is simply a tag-team of Mohammedan youth spreading al-taquiyya (untruths to infidels).
I came across an almost identical poster on a U.S. RWDB blog about a year ago, and the technique used by “Fatamah” was almost the same. During the course of polite argument, I realised that “Fatamah” had three distinct personalities.
Quoting various Sura from the Koran, and asking her to explain why this could not be perceived as a blueprint for world domination, I received the usual reply, that I was “taking it out of context”.
When I asked her to identify the context, amid much obfuscation, she finally replied that the bloodthirsty quotes were only applicable to a time of war.
All through this, the goal posts were shifted, no comment was made admitting that Dar al-Harb (“land of war”) referred to any country that was not yet a Muslim country, and her (?) avoidance of the issues eventually turned into personal abuse against me.
The question I asked “Fatamah” and never had answered, I’ll ask our trolling proud2 instead:
If at your local mosque your imam said “Thursday night is Jihad night!” and implored you to sneak into the houses of neighbouring infidels and slit their throats as they sleep, would you feel duty bound to comply?”A answer would surprise me.
This is Tim’s blog obviously, but perhaps an open thread if there’s a lull in the news sometime soon might be possible?
While P2B has some definite blind spots with regard to unsavory behavior by Muslims both past and present, she’s also been quite reasonable and polite even when not treated that way. I, personally, have found the discussion(s) both interesting and edifying, however off-topic, and to judge by various comments I’m not alone in that. Perhaps it’s all an act and ‘she’ is really some gibbering middle-aged male jihadbot, but I’d rather risk wasting time on a troll than erring in the other direction and cutting off potentially-fruitful dialogue.
P2B, if you (and any others) are interested, I’ll open a thread on my own blog and you’re welcome to continue the discussion there. And, yes, I certainly won’t mind getting a bit of traffic from it, but my primary motives are genuine—I really do want to provide a forum for this (and other reasonably-civilized explorations of differing worldviews).
Hmm, is this the same Michelle Malkin who’s keeping track of ‘The The Jutlands Post’ cartoons? (It’s ok, Michelle, I used to stutter a bit when I was a kid too, though usually when I was speaking) Is this the same Malkin who claims to know the national interests of Denmark better than its own elected representatives?
It is? Oh, well it’s probably good they censored her.
Reading PB2 just re-confirmed to me that islam and it’s followers are in direct conflict with the ideals of secular and democratic societies.
As someone commented above - if PB2 is an example of ‘the moderate muslim’ then we be in a whole heap ‘o trouble.Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 02 09 at 01:21 AM • permalinkBTW/.PB2 reminded me of Aussie islamic fanatic Wassim Doureihi, the head of Hizb-ut Tahir in Australia.
Same evasive fast talking ‘cannot judge muslim brother Bin-Laden’ crap.The aim of his group is to establish the Caliphate and Sharia in Australia - they were going to be outlawed as a terrorist group but somehow managed to get a pass from ASIO.
Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 02 09 at 02:06 AM • permalinkProud2be doesn’t know if OBL had anything to do with 9/11, even though the evidence is overwhelming and the evil Osama has admitted and even boasted about it on tape more than once. She would have to witness him doing it in order to be certain. That’s ridiculous.
So what do people like P2b believe really happened? Oh yeah, they saw a movie that explained it all. Don’t forget about the 4000 Jews who stayed home from the towers that day.
I know there are people who think 9/11 was an American and/or Zionist conspiracy, but don’t expect me to take them seriously.
#215 Kaboom, I think you are right. Your question also goes to the heart of a major distinction between Islam and Chrisianity (and perhaps other faiths).
A Christian would dismiss such an exhortation to murder out of hand, as the temptation of the Devil. However a Muslim, if he thought it truly came from Allah, would not dismiss any exhortation, no matter how evil.
There are no rational/moral limits imposed on Allah, whereas the Christian God is indeed constrained by morality. This is a New Testament idea (with hints in the Old Testament) which came mainly from the influence of the contemporary Greeks.
To start with I live with my mum and step dad, and my step dad wasn’t born here, so unfortunately he would find it a little difficult to read all of this, because while he can speak and read fluently, length makes him tired.
Kyda Sylvester, If I could not talk them out of it, and they persisted in their Idea, then I would have to turn them in as a Muslim. I don’t need the deahts of millions on my head. And I would turn them in regardless of whether they were by best friend or family.
Kaboom, I would tell him he was nuts, tell authorities if he was serious, and then I would go to sleep.
Posted by proud2be@muslimah on 2006 02 09 at 09:20 AM • permalinkTimT 192
Andrea, I think we mightn’t have seen quite so many comments by Proud2be if some of the regular commentators weren’t so argumentative.
I vehemently disagree! We are NOT argumentative!
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 09 at 12:04 PM • permalinkFew more points..
Kaboom.. If you want to read a REALLY up to date treatise on World Domination, look no further than “Rebuilding Americas Defences” by the intellectual pygmies behind PNAC..
And what an unproductive question..
What sort of answer do you expect and how will you assess it anyway??All.. When you have finished having your hate fest at the expense of, Oh, approx 1 billion people on the strength of the actions of a minority, perhaps you can explain to me the morality of much of what the west “civilisations” has be doing over, say, the last 300 years??
What do you think came first, expropriation of Third World resources (inc. Oil) or an irrational hatred of the West for completely mysterious reasons??
What do you get from the hate fest, by the way??On the eternal topic of September 11th and exactly who was responsible, there are just so many observed, photographed, recorded, calculated and documented anomalies pertaining to the bushniks account, that it would be an unwise person who would take that account on face value..
To the actual subject of the Thread..
Even in the 21st century, the same mad prejudices that have caused so much grief for so long are perpetuated. I just can’t understand how we can be so stupid, as a species, to act thus.The Jylland Posten is a neocon rag and its oxymoronically termed Culture Editor is an admirer of the odious arch Zionist Daniel Pipes, of the Orwellian US Institute of Peace… Hardly surprising that this genius would deliberately do something that would be guaranteed to stir up hotheads in the Muslim world. The same paper did say it was going to print Holocaust cartoons (!!???) but has since “changed its mind” Why do you think that was and don’t you think that would be oh so peachy a way of showing just how “balanced” their disrespect of every thing/body/religion/belief (etc) can be??
Not likely. If Therzal IS anybody besides itself, it would be Bongoman. Same style, same no-substance, same vague hand-waving, same insinuative conspiranoia, same everything.
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) was definitely NOT this fucktard slug.Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 10 at 04:53 PM • permalinkOh crap! The text appearing in red above is NOT a link. At least I hope it’s not one. If there really IS somebody out there with THAT e-address (presumably posting in the “special interest” venues), and they start getting a buncha email from this link (if it is one) my apologies!
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 10 at 04:56 PM • permalinkI realize this thread is pretty dead.
But regarding Proud2be, there certainly were some odd comments from “her” on a previous thread.“Im actually ten generation aussie.” (Later revised to seven. Which is it?)
“Suicide Bombing IS NOT ALLOWED” (in Islam).
(Yet in another comment “she” was defending the bombing atrocities in Iraq as examples of brave Muslims fighting against the evil occupiers. I suppose the videotaping headhackers would also qualify.)A deceitful apologist for the Islamists is my best guess.
Yeah, mayyyyybe deceitful, or more likely just in a big hurry and very careless. And yeah, she was wrong about EVERYTHING, to and including slavery, for goodness’ sake! BUT. Keep in mind, she was outnumbered by about 20-to-1, while answering pretty-nearly post-for-post, in real time. Check the time-stamps on the posts in those threads. Whatever they’re teaching her in that school of hers, it looks like typing was somewhere in the curriculum. Plus she was never snide or rude, in stark contrast to this weasel therzal/bongoman. Is this not apparent to you?
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 10 at 05:42 PM • permalinkBut regardless how impressed you are with the fast typing, she, he, maybe even they (see #215 re: the interesting theory that they’re tag team Islamist thread hijackers) definitely seem fake. Tenth generation Australian? Sounds more like a compulsive liar with a bad memory.
What’s apparent to me is that this is one weird commenter(s) and only God knows if it’s a he, a she,or a they.
This particular hatethread is about crazu ayrabs and all tha began with the towers..
Can you answer the following questions without Swearing or invoking magic or fairies?
Flight 77.. Pentagon
1) The entry point is TOO small for a 757 to have made and then completely disappeard through. Simple as that.. All else is just smoke and snow to distract. This is the “magic Boeing (mB)” of this event, just as JFK’s assassination had the pristine “magic bullet”..
But OK…
2) Where the hell are the following bits of plane..
a) Wings, big, HEAVY and sticking out thingies.. Or was this a “SwingWing” 757?
b) Tail, big and sticking up thingie.. Or was this a “SwingTail” 757?
c) Engines, VERY big, heavy and usually always pretty much intact at most crash scenes. The only impeller assembly shown looks very much like the sort of thing that a Cruise Missile might use…
So you really believe that all these component parts magically folded up and went into the tiny hole made by the mB, in their entirety??
Have you ever seen anything like that before??
Remember, when the planes went into the Towers (and more on that later) they cut their way through the more fragile windows almost in one piece.. Now, there was no such damage or signs of it on the much more heavily built Pentagon in the precollapse pictures OR of the sheared off wings that you would expect to see laying outside…
3) Bodies.. Have you seen any photos of ambulances around the site, or the usual makeshift morgue? I haven’t.
4) Luggage.. Where did all those suitcases go?
5) Why is the lawn not gouged and burned up??Tower Collapse..
When I watched that on TV as it was happening, I thought to myself..“That looks just like a controlled demolition…”
One question occurs (amongst many.. )
If it was the heat weakened steel that allowed the collapse and the fires looked to be off middle in both the towers, why did they collapse straight down and the top sections above the fires, not topple over sideways??
I undestand that avgas can not burn hot enough under these conditions, to effect steel..Answers???
Remember, if just one aspect is incorrect and or questionable, you have in all honesty (!!) to look at the entire situation..therzal, I’m convinced.
But I’m sad that Osama, who was later seen cackling with glee, and all those Muslims who were dancing in the streets, now look like fools. What were they so happy about anyway?
Bush and the Jews really made them seem like bloodthirsty idiots. Who will now go and wipe this shame from the face of Islam? Heads must roll for this! Mohammed, peace be upon him, will not be mocked!! Behead the infidels!!!
But a question occurs. How did those sneaky Jews and “bushniks” persuade a bunch of peace loving Muslims to fly the planes into those towers full of ordinary unsuspecting people? Isn’t that ironic when you recall that Islam is the Religion of Peace. (And lame conpiracy theories?)
Newman 236
But regardless how impressed you are with the fast typing, she, he, maybe even they ... definitely seem fake. Tenth generation Australian? Sounds more like a compulsive liar with a bad memory.
I disagree. I think she was the real deal, and I hope she’s still reading. She’s certainly been given a LOT to think about, this week, so I hope she’s doing the follow-on research that various posters pointed her towards. Oh, by “the real deal” I mean “an omni-gullible fundamentalist who sincerely believes the many ridiculous things she says.”
By contrast, I present your new friend Therzal. Therzal is NOT a continuation of Proud2Be, and indeed, I’d even say he’s not a “deceitful apologist for the Islamists.” Because the Islamists believe in Islamism; this turd, as you are probably noticing by now, has no real core convictions. This is your basic standard-issue all-purpose chimpeachment conspiranoid leftist nihilist fuckwit, a common commie innaddawoids. A troll. For ample examples of this life-form, spend some time at the Kos or Democrat Underground sites.
And would you PLEASE not apologize to him for calling him a lunatic? Frankly calling him a lunatic gives this Kool-aid-drinking Kos-tard too much credit.Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 11 at 07:20 PM • permalinkStupid DD..
Appreciate the insightful nature of your worldly comments. You plainly do not understand what a real discussion is yet you clearly demonstrate what a preneanderthal ad-hominem is.. Just wonder whether you know anything beyond hte confines of your own skull.Somehow doubt it.. Enough of hte nastiness already, oiy..General..
Please answer the questions..
If you can’t, then say so, or share with us all your understandings of quantuum physics that can explain how a 50 ton aircraft can disappear without any real trace..
Lets start with an explanation of the non Presence of wings and Tail assembly…If it make you uncomfortable, it should. Even the most diehard brain dead adherants to the “established bushnik line” have to acknowledge that there are certain common experiences and truths that just do not quite hold up in the case of the offical version. Unless you invoke unknown science or magic, that is..
If it make you angry, then that is probably because you can’t reconcile your observations and what your brain is trying to tell you, with your preconceived notions.
That is a very unpleasant situation to be in.Don’t waste the power of your neurone(s) thinking up pithy epithets, you just make yourselves look like dorks..
Think about the question, check out the credentials of people and witnesses involved..
Have you see the video clips of the New York firemane who said it looked as if demolition charges had been set and detonated??. What, you think they were stand ins, actors, even thought they have since been located and requestioned and said the same things..One turd does not a sewage plant make, but it can still smell pretty odd?? Eh, Silly DD?
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
Disappointing.