What's happened to Islam?

[bob x]

Nobody had to conspire to make Islam look monstrous. It has looked monstrous to me for decades, well before any "neo-conservatives" existed.

[Muslimwoman]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

the sooner you accept that islam has faults in practice

Shalom BB

Could you expand please. I have my own views about this but would like to know where you draw the line between what is and is not an Islamic practice, because clearly we can only 'blame' the negative issues that are actually an Islamic teaching and not those actions that are purely political.

Originally Posted by bananabrain

the sooner the palestinians you presumably profess to care about will get their own state and be able to live in peace and coexistance with their israeli neighbours.

So who in your mind would govern this Palestinian state? Of course the prior proposal for a 2 state agreement still meant the Israeli's governed the Palestinian state as well as their own, hence the rejection. Would the displaced Palestinians be allowed to return to the new Palestinian state? Who would financially support this?

Salaam

As a general note. I do not accept that groups such as Hamas are acting Islamically and object to my faith being blamed for their actions. In the same way I feel sure BB would object to people suggesting that the awful actions of the Israeli government are demonstrative of the Jewish faith and it's teachings.

[bananabrain]

@friend:

i'm not interested in what huntingdon has to say, particularly if he categorises a civilisation as "judeo-christian". that label has absolutely nothing to do with judaism in practice as it never, ever takes into account jewish religious values other than as they are mediated through christianity and the universalist ethical values of the "enlightenment". so don't quote him at me as a means of showing that the jewish religion has something to do with causing the "clash of civilisations" - it doesn't, although it has surely been affected by the effects.

and if you want proper responses, i'm going to need to understand your english better. if i understand you, the point is this - the israelis have an enormous amount to gain by the end of the hatred and destruction in the middle east. it should be obvious to you that "greater israel" is not regarded by anybody worth speaking of as a feasible goal, at least if you mean "between the nile and the euphrates". "land for peace" will be the formula - the question will be which bits of land. all the wastefulness that we are witnessing is the haggling over the price, with both sides trying to get something for nothing. everybody understands that the border's going to be the green line, so the sooner we all get to it and stop with the wall-related land grabs and the attempts to establish a rocket landing zone the better for everyone. and, while we're at it, anyone who talked about "palestine" before 1948, such as balfour for example, meant the british mandate in palestine, which was made up of "palestine" and "transjordan" - the state of jordan where you live, much of whose population is palestinian. now, whilst i am not saying, like some, that "jordan already constitutes a palestinian state", it certainly has a larger role to play in this particular debate over who gets what.

there are those who see this as a religious conflict. it is better for all of us if this does not occur. i would find the prospect of the values of the hardline settlers directing the army utterly appalling; it is to be hoped that this can be averted without a civil war. unfortunately i still don't actually know this yet.

@cyris ali:

You're a moderator of a religious forum? I'll have nothing to do with this.

you can't have it both ways - either it's "one faith" and criticism of one group of muslims reflects on all, or it's an agglomeration of sects, traditions and attitudes and criticism of one group does not necessarily reflect on all. if people insist on treating "islam" as one thing, then i'm entitled to criticise this one thing if that is the subject of this thread. as it happens, i believe islam is nearly as fragmented as christianity is. now, of course, if you want to criticise judaism, come over and do it in the judaism forum and i'm sure i'll join in - but we're not doing that presently. saying "ooh, but what about judaism" doesn't actually address the central point. furthermore no faith should expect a free ride from criticism and no faith is free of idiots, propaganda and chauvinism. being a moderator shouldn't prevent me from pointing that out. i do it freely to my co-religionists as anyone here will tell you.

as for 9/11, believe what you want if it makes things better in your pink and fluffy world.

Originally Posted by Muslimwoman

Could you expand please. I have my own views about this but would like to know where you draw the line between what is and is not an Islamic practice, because clearly we can only 'blame' the negative issues that are actually an Islamic teaching and not those actions that are purely political.

it's basically the argument you've seen me having with abdullah; if his values are really those of the consensus of scholars, there is no present hope of political islam coming to an understanding with the rest of the world who refuse to convert, refuse to be dhimmi and refuse to die. i am consulting the islamic scholars i know to try and understand this myself. islam will have to accept (as it appears to be trying to do in turkey) an accommodation and it will have to relinquish the idea of a theocracy. it will need, like every other system, to understand how "church" and "state" need to be separated at least in practice.

So who in your mind would govern this Palestinian state? Of course the prior proposal for a 2 state agreement still meant the Israeli's governed the Palestinian state as well as their own, hence the rejection. Would the displaced Palestinians be allowed to return to the new Palestinian state? Who would financially support this?

gosh, that's a facer. i'm not sure i agree with your analysis of the original agreement, however. the point of this would be that the palestinians would elect their own government, which would govern like any other respectable democratic authority. of course the problem at present is that the israelis don't trust the prospective authority to act sensibly (viz hamas in gaza, democratically elected and still hasn't realised it can't just keep blaming the israelis for everything and chucking rockets over the border) and until they do they won't ease up. of course abbas and fatah would be a better prospect but they're so hopelessly corrupt and inept that you'll end up with hamas again.

i personally don't know what i would think about the displaced palestinians returning to the new state, except that the only way it could feasibly be financed is by the arab states coughing up reparations for their exiled jewish ex-inhabitants who are all now living in israel. it's not exactly like they're short of cash *cough cough saudi cough cough kuwait cough cough etc) and, of course, the new state would have to allow its jewish citizens equal rights. i'm not holding my breath for that considering that selling land to a jew is punishable by death in the PA.

In the same way I feel sure BB would object to people suggesting that the awful actions of the Israeli government are demonstrative of the Jewish faith and it's teachings.

i would also argue, of course, that many of the actions that israeli governments have and continue to do are not at all "awful", but rather the opposite - remember governments (in israel at least) come from many different parties and have many different and sometimes contradictory policies. i am not in the business of granting blanket exemptions or blanket condemnations. condemning policy is one thing, condemning practice is another and condemning intent is yet another. nobody is 100% blameless and nobody is 100% guilty. to argue otherwise is futile.

i would also like to say that as interesting as it is to see you and bob knocking spots off each other here and elsewhere discussing this, i think you'd both be happier if you tried to be a little more amicable about it - you're both reasonable people with a great deal to contribute and locking horns about deir yassin or arabic nazi-sympathising simply gives the impression of "hard cases making bad law". you cannot extrapolate generalisations of a faith, culture or religion from singular instances of extreme action as you both must know.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[bob x]

i would also like to say that as interesting as it is to see you and bob knocking spots off each other here and elsewhere discussing this, i think you'd both be happier if you tried to be a little more amicable about it - you're both reasonable people...

I am losing faith in her "reasonableness". She is now, not just swallowing the neo-Nazi propaganda about how the Jews staged the Holocaust to make other people look bad (sicker than Ahmadinejab), but expecting me to think this is a normal kind of thing to say. I have often been disappointed by apparently "moderate" Muslims who turn out to buy into the insane hatreds at some level, so I am no longer surprised by it, but I am still disappointed when it happens.

[Eclectic Mystic]

Then there's what other people think.

[Muslimwoman]

Originally Posted by bob x

I am losing faith in her "reasonableness". She is now, not just swallowing the neo-Nazi propaganda about how the Jews staged the Holocaust to make other people look bad (sicker than Ahmadinejab), but expecting me to think this is a normal kind of thing to say. I have often been disappointed by apparently "moderate" Muslims who turn out to buy into the insane hatreds at some level, so I am no longer surprised by it, but I am still disappointed when it happens.

Wind your neck in Bob and don't you ever dare to speak for me in such a manner.

We are all now aware of your hatred toward Islam and all Muslims, so it does beg the question why you joined an interfaith forum, was it just to stir things up?

I have never anywhere near suggested that Jews staged the holocaust. If you bother to read some of the threads on CR you will know that I have spoken strongly against people that suggest the holocaust didn't happen, that the number of 6 million dead is overstated or that it was a set up by Jews. If you do not understand my view on something then have the decency to ask for clarification but do not go around incorrectly stating my beliefs. You see history is one of my favourite subjects and I try to read everything I can from all sides, which I believe gives a more balanced view of the realities - perhaps you should try that.

However, I am aware that some people who happen to be Jewish worked with the Nazi party, some sought the aid of the Third Reich and some became very, very rich selling out Jewish people. They are of course in the very small minority but they did work against the Jewish nation for their own ends and their actions are well documented.

But of course you can't accept this, it is only Muslims that are bad to the core. I really wonder why I bother speaking to you, you have a very one sided knowledge of history and you are a bigot.

[Muslimwoman]

Forgiver me BB, I shall come back and respond to your post when my anger subsides but thank you for your response.

Salaam

[bob x]

I have never anywhere near suggested that Jews staged the holocaust.

Tao Equus did, and you stepped in to say the evidence was in his favor. If you wish to backtrack now, fine, but don't pretend it never happened or try to play the victim because you were taken at your word.

[bananabrain]

However, I am aware that some people who happen to be Jewish worked with the Nazi party, some sought the aid of the Third Reich and some became very, very rich selling out Jewish people. They are of course in the very small minority but they did work against the Jewish nation for their own ends and their actions are well documented.

considering just how small a minority these people are alleged to have been it is astonishing how much they are mentioned for "balance", as if this was in some way significant. what is the actual point here? that there are some really bad apples? or is the actual point that holocaust denial is widespread in the islamic world? surely one doesn't have an awful lot to do with the other - you may well be able to find a jewish nazi (as nonsensical as this concept actually is), but it doesn't in any way make it OK for this putative traitor to be made into a general justification that we brought the shoah on ourselves. my wife's father's family were almost all murdered in auschwitz. he himself was in his early teens, with a slightly younger brother and a much younger sister. his sister - my wife's aunt, who looked in the one photograph we have of her just like my son - was *8* when she was gassed and burnt, along with her parents and grandparents (that's assuming of course they didn't die in a more awful way like some). so you find some profiteer somewhere who sold out his own people. maybe you find some rich industrialist who started off thinking that the nazis were only after the riff-raff and peddlers, not rich industrialists and wasn't that a good idea to clean up society and make the trains run on time. you can't blame one on the other. to try and link them is simply perverted. i'm not suggesting this is what you are doing, but this is what some do, all in the name of perpetuating some sick fantasy about the sneaky crafty underhand jews to excuse their own deflated hubris. i know how the whole "it's a european problem, imposed on the arab world" argument goes. the fact is, it's not as simple as that. ever heard of the "farhud" of baghdad?

Farhud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

there's one pogrom that can't be blamed on us. it happened *before* the establishment of israel. it happened in the middle east, not europe. it marked the beginning of the end for the oldest continuous jewish community in the world, since 586 BCE. there are now precisely 45 jews in baghdad.

the fact is, any equitable settlement for the palestinian refugees will also take account of the corresponding jewish refugees from egypt, iraq, iran, lebanon, syria, libya and elsewhere, the vast majority of whom now live in israel. next time ahmedinejad suggests that the israelis should "move back to poland", perhaps someone should point out that he'd need to import approximately 250,000 iranian jews himself to make room for the palestinians. i wonder how happy he'd be about that? i wonder if he can blame the holocaust on them?

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Muslimwoman]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

considering just how small a minority these people are alleged to have been it is astonishing how much they are mentioned for "balance", as if this was in some way significant. what is the actual point here?

The point for me BB is that in my discussions with Bob, who is seriously anti Islamic, he continually suggests that the insignificant number of Muslim suicide bombers are demonstrative of all Muslims and Islamic teachings. When discussing israel with him it appears that one side is totally innocent and is a victim of the insane, evil Muslims.

I accept that Islamic terrorists kill and their actions are significant but in comparison to the number that do not kill or desire killing it is hardly a true reflection of what a Muslim is. In the same way that the insignificant amount of Jews that worked for the Nazi's is not representative of what a Jew is.

[bob x]

The support for those Muslims who commit acts of horrific violence, and disseminate Nazi propaganda, etc. is the majority of the population in Palestine, sufficiently large to elect a President like Ahmadinejad in Iran, and so on. Trying to pretend that this is a "small" phenomenon is not going to cut it here.

When discussing israel with him it appears that one side is totally innocent

I have never said any such thing. But there is no moral equivalence between the two sides.

[Muslimwoman]

Originally Posted by bob x

Tao Equus did, and you stepped in to say the evidence was in his favor. If you wish to backtrack now, fine, but don't pretend it never happened or try to play the victim because you were taken at your word.

Tao said that there were Jews prominent, perhaps even orchestrators, in the holocaust. The suggestion being that his studies were showing that there were Jews prominent in the Nazi holocaust and perhaps his studies would show even orchestrators.

The fact is that there were Jews, working for the Nazi's, prominent in the holocaust. They were few in number but their actions were significant. You disagreed with Tao and I stated there is evidence to support his view, that view being there were prominent Jews.

I certainly could have made my view more clear but would have expected a reasonable person to ask me if I was suggesting that the holocaust was actually orchestrated by the Jews, to which I would reply no.

[Muslimwoman]

Originally Posted by bob x

The support for those Muslims who commit acts of horrific violence, and disseminate Nazi propaganda, etc. is the majority of the population in Palestine, sufficiently large to elect a President like Ahmadinejad in Iran, and so on. Trying to pretend that this is a "small" phenomenon is not going to cut it here.

And despite trying to explain why these people hold these views you still don't get it. They have reason to be angry and this has turned into hatred for a people. It is wrong but there are reasons for the current views of thes people.

A small phenomenon? Are you now suggesting that Shia Iran is representative of the Muslim Ummah? There are between 130-190 million Shia Muslims and over 1.3 billion Sunni Muslim - I would suggest that is a small percentage.

Originally Posted by bob x

I have never said any such thing. But there is no moral equivalence between the two sides.

In your opinion.

[bob x]

The ugly rhetoric in support of horrific violence is pervasive in the Muslim world, with the active and passive support of huge percentages of the populace. You with your gamesmanship about how it's not really a big problem, and let's turn the conversation to other bad people, are what I mean by "passive support".

[Muslimwoman]

Originally Posted by bob x

You with your gamesmanship about how it's not really a big problem, and let's turn the conversation to other bad people, are what I mean by "passive support".

Well if you can think of a way of discussing why the Palestinians feel the way they do without mentioning Israel then I would be interested to hear about it.

You are right of course Bob, I spend hours posting on CR that I do not believe in violence or hatred, I believe in interfaith dialogue and respect but it is all just a ploy to support Islamic terrorism. (I assume you know what sarcasm is?)