 |
|
|---|
Anyone who has been a parent long enough is familiar with the phenomenon of the hormone impaired, know-it-all, teenager, who is a danger to both himself and his friends. The kid who regularly makes his parents desperate to answer one of those ads in the back of the family magazines for a boarding school far, far away that will apply Tough Love to their little spawn and in theory, make him fit for civilized company by the time he is thirty-five.
Adolescents have an over-inflated ego, believing themselves to be super competent, knowing everything as well being convinced they are immortal, while actually suffering from overwhelming feelings of inadequacy and a mortal fear of hard work. Teens consistently want everything their way. They sleep all day if at all possible and stay up too long into the night. They scream, "I hate you," for no apparent reason and in the next breath, demand their allowance. They blame everything on everyone else, especially their parents, while failing to take responsibility for their own actions claiming straight faced, "You made me do it i.e lie, "borrow" the car, “borrow” the money, etc. because you would not let me go with my friends and stay out all weekend." One day the parents wake up and look at their "special" child, the one who was so interesting and had so much potential just yesterday, asking, "Who ARE you"?
So too was the world rudely awakened on 9/11 and is now looking at the Islamic ummah all claiming to be following the "Religion of peace," while some peace lovers were slamming fully loaded jet-planes into sky scrapers, asking: "Who are you"?
On the six-o-clock news, day after day, we watch in bemused bewilderment incessant reruns of the writhing, screeching, spitting sons of Allah, with toothless open mouths, their fists punching the air screaming, "WE HATE YOU, WE HATE YOU, WE HATE YOU," and wonder if they've all got a screw loose or just haven't had any breakfast. Yet, like any good parent, the West is expected to continue giving a generous aid "allowance" in a gesture of unconditional love to the indolent sons of Allah; because, they are not working and are not employable due to having obtained one too many "religious studies" degrees in some non-accredited madrassa—And of course, that is all our fault!
Islamic clerics screech in nasal tones, crying crocodile tears every Friday from the bully pulpit of their mosques, "Islam is perfect! It is for all time! It is absolutely compatible with modernity and of course. . . adulterers must be —stoned." In the meantime, millions of sons of Allah are risking their lives trying to immigrate to the West because in their part of the world obtaining a piece of falafel is getting harder and harder to do.
Like all teens, the sons of Allah claim they know "everything!" EVERYTHING one needs to know is contained in the "perfect" Qur'an and the hadith from nuclear physics to how to cut one's finger nails—i.e., like this: " . . . start from the right index finger to the right small finger then the right thumb. Thereafter, the left hand from the small finger to the thumb. Cutting of the toe nails will be from the small left toe to the small right toe." (Mirqaat vol.2 pg.45) and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best”
And they HATE our clothes. Unlike our adolescents, the sons of Allah don't want us to look "cool" to keep us from embarrassing them down at the mall in front of their friends. No, the sons of Allah prefer we make ourselves downright ugly in a shroud made by Omar the Tentmaker, a garment that will hide the shapes of our women and make our females look as unappealing as theirs. Although, fair is fair. It would really be a blessing if some of our 300-pounders would wear the burqa. One cannot deny that the veil certainly does solve the "what to wear" dilemma if one only has one sack in one color—black—simple.
Like any adolescents, the sons of Allah are hormone impaired and sex obsessed. The whole focus of their failing societies appears to be on how to keep evil in check by covering the source of evil—women—from head to toe to fingertips, so as not to let "evil out" an evil that would tempt those weak, undisciplined sons of Allah into immorality. In the mean time, they are "doing it," behind the tent with the sanction of a little thing called "temporary marriage,” to anything that is moving from nine to twenty-five. After that, women are too old anyway and only good for being recycled for 72 raisins in Paradise.
And of course, like any kid, the sons of Allah insist on their right to obtaining things that are dangerous, such as WMDs, long before they are mature enough to handle these; shrieking and demonstrating that "everybody" else has them, especially the highly precocious Jewish neighbor kid, the one who consistently wins the science prizes and plays the violin to boot.
So we pace and debate and worry that the recalcitrant sons of Allah are going to do something rash and hurt someone in their adolescent zeal, all the while asking the professionals, "What to do, what to do"? The answer comes to us after much soul searching and many sleepless nights:
"Now, darlings, you just calm down and drink your tea. No, you can not play with those nukes!
Mommy is just going to have lie down in a darkened room with a cold cloth on her head. And after the migraine goes away, she will call about that nice boarding school in the middle of nowhere, the one with the great, big fence around it, that might be able to apply some Tough Love and make you fit for civilization in a decade or two; not to mention bring up your test scores. In the mean time, we'll just have to lock you all in your room."
And what is "THE" truth that you are bragging about.
ابومنظور جوزجانی از او پرسيد:
- حرف بزن حقيقت چيست ؟
وشرزين در پاسخ گفت:
- سخنی که اززبان لالی گفته می شود و کری ميشنود وکوری برکاغذ می آورد
When parents don't take responsibility:
Links between Abuse/Neglect and Juvenile/Teenage Delinquency
Overwhelming numbers of adolescent runaways, teens involved in delinquent acts or violent behaviors, and adult criminal and sexual offenders report childhood histories of physical battering, emotional abuse and sexual exploitation. Researchers have used interviews, case file analysis and reviews of court and protective services records to determine the prevalence of maltreatment in the lives of incarcerated adolescents. Results consistently reveal a history of recurring and often severe maltreatment in the childhood of delinquent teens.
A 1998 Boston University study concludes that children who are abused and neglected are 1.8 times more likely to be arrested as juveniles, and 1.5 times more likely to be arrested as adults, than children who have not been exposed to abuse or neglect.This is an alarming trend, as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts predicts a 24 percent increase in the adolescent population between 1995 and 2005.
Without intervention to stop the trend of juvenile incarceration, we will continue on the path of building more prisons for our abused/neglected children and the adults they will become rather than investing in prevention and treatment options that would improve their opportunities for success.[278] As Margaret Mead has stated aptly: "The solution of adult problems tomorrow depends in large measure upon the way our children grow up today. There is no greater insight into the future than recognizing when we save our children we save ourselves."
Source:
Massachusetts Call to Action Website
http://www.masskids.org/cta/cta_vi_ch18.html
Thank you for that long quote Ali, even though the editors object to such material from other sites. They move mine to Wesslog regularly. ;-)
There certainly are many, many abused and neglected children in the U.S. who ultimately become criminals. However, not one of them has yet strapped on an explosives belt and murdered innocents in the name of Christian jihad, half-way around the world. We aren't breeding these children by the millions, instructing them in special schools to hate the Islamic world, urging them to demonstrate in the streets screaming "DEATH TO ISLAMIC TERRORISM!"
Not too many of our people have sought revenge for 9/11 or for other Islamic atrocities against the West prior to 9/11. However, there are a few western born Muslims who have committed jihad against the "infidel."
Therefore, since you are comparing the education of children:
Child to killer
by Fatima Farideh Nedjat
Reasons behind idolization of destructiveness
". . . The relationship between the status of women in the "constructed Islam" (different from what the holy book prescribes) by the heads of some theocratic governments and the environmental profile of being raised by some abused mothers in a religiously strict, ascetic household lead us to the psychological, ideological, and sociological reasons why one can be encouraged to idolize destructiveness in order to become a martyr. I describe a few socially situated conditions among such populations. The lack of public and economic benefits results in functional illiteracy. Women's oppression then flourishes under these constructed Islamic traditions. This creates dominant psychological conditions that promote fundamentalism.
The political aspect of suicide bombing among Muslim fundamentalists is the central concept of this paper. We must understand the instigating forces that drive individuals to become perpetrators of suicide bombing. These influences are divided into four categorical segments: The psychological impact of family environment; the moral efficacy of religion; hegemonic ideology; and a society of organized violence. All of these forces are inculcated through women's oppression, the agent whose nurturing power becomes dysfunctional.
The backbone of such structure is a theocratic government ruled by hard-line fundamentalist militants, whose outlook is determined by a literal interpretation of scripture. This oppression produces fundamentalist households in which abused, narcissistic mothers raise children. The current global violence perpetrated in the name of "God" by the Islamism fundamentalists makes one wonder what encourages individuals to act so violently. What is the ideology behind the phenomenon that enforces such behavior?
The viewpoint justifying the act of violence is defined as "retaliation and retribution" in the classical Shari'a law. Muslim societies living under this ideology must systematize such ideology within the government, in order to execute punishments terrorizing the unbeliever, or the enemy of Islam. The violent act of suicide bombing and the moral efficacy of religion are interlocking. The government passively observes as the disease of intellectual deprivation is spread among lower socio-economic groups that are functionally illiterate. The interrelation of martyrdom and reprisal are positively reinforced within the social context as a pillar of Islam, Jihad. The child growing up is conditioned to believe in martyrdom. For instance, during the Iraq and Iran War, positive reinforcement for becoming shahid's family (the family of a martyr) came in the form of extra coupons for food rationing and monthly payments of an equal to $50 to families who lost a son in the war. . .
Full article in the Iranian: http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2002/February/Mind/index.html
---
["Well, I read it;" you might say, "now let's close it!"]Beside all of junk comparison made in this post, usage of "sons of Allah" reminds me how most of western people, despite their claimed intellectuality, can not see the world other than the way their parent taught them.
No Muslim considers himself/herself "son" of "Allah", and as a matter of fact that is against the very basic faith of Islam.
I should remind those arrogant people, who still believe they are “son of God” the time when they use to drill the skull of mentally ill people so devil can come out of their brain, while hundreds of volumes of Muslims’ medical books were written about treating mental disease by psychological methods.
History is full of ups and downs, but it shows arrogance is sign of ignorance!
Wessie writes:
“There certainly are many, many abused and neglected children in the U.S. who ultimately become criminals. However, not one of them has yet strapped on an explosives belt and murdered innocents in the name of Christian jihad”
Christian Jihad! You think the last one was during crusades, huh?
I don’t know how we should categorize “Ku Klux Klan”? I bet it’s common to consider them just a racist group; but can one underestimate their claimed holly Christian cause? And if you think it’s just part of history: it’s less than 2 years since then to-be majority-leader of US senate, from Conservative-Christian GOP lost his position because of his swift segregationist remarks.
It seems arrogance sometimes provoks ignorance not only about others, but also about yourself!
Just don’t get me wrong about how I think of Christianity. I’m just trying to say, Wessie’s points are as ridiculous as trying to condemn Anthropology just because Hitler used it for justifying his racist conducts.
That was a well written article, and quite funny as well. I for one enjoyed it a lot and agree with most of the analogies. I'm just wondering how to portray the normal poor and non-fanatic people among those fundamentalists in your analogy....
I also liked Ali Mostashari's continuation of it. Wessie, he was not talking about western children! you didn't get it, did you? It was more of a remark on why those 'sons of allah' might have become so impaired and what the best logical way is to deal with the situation.
Anyway, I had a good time reading this. :)
O, and since some of the hot tempers are cooled a bit now, let me also apologize to you Wessie for my tone. Although my criticisms of you still stand, nothing justifies my using such tones. As you can see I have no problem in conceding to my mistakes and apologizing for them. I ahve already done that a couple of times here as well.... :)
And a spelling correction:
Islam is not the religion of 'peace', it is the religion of 'pieces'!
Well, the article by Alexandria is a typical misguided mentality currently shared by unfortunately a considerable number of people in the West. This is a mentality that claims democracy, tolerance and diversity but at the same harbors one the most intolerat and hateful worldview.
Alexandira is an example of someone who watches Foxnews and CNN, learns about Middle East through the eyes of Tomas Friedman and twisted self-hating Middle Easterns.
Islam is a great religion which has survived for 1400 years. It will survive desparate attacks of people like Alexandria and will also survive the abuses of Mullahs and religious extremists.
First AIS, let me thank you for your public apology. That is very big of you. You are a gentleman and a scholar. :-)
Second, I am glad that you liked the article and found it humorous. It was meant to be quite funny as well as stingingly truthful. I had people in my office rolling on the floor after reading it. Although there were the usual concerns about a "religion of peace" fatwa. ;-)
As to Ali's post—given that he used U.S. statistics, I felt that it was important to counter with the pertinent information for the SoA and how they are educated. It is not the same in the U.S. as I mentioned, since we have no madrassas. The closest thing might be "gang education" which of course is not formal, but just as lethal. The striking similarity is that gangs will try to murder anyone who tries to leave—same as Islam.
---
Borghan, can you be specific as to what is ridiculous about the article? Which points are not true? Please name them.
You cite the Crusades, yet the last one was finished hundreds of years ago. The SoA continually forget that the First Crusade was called because of Islamic aggression having taken over the Holy Land from its historical inhabitants the Jews and the Christians; peoples who resided in the region thousands and hundreds of years, respectively, prior to the invention of Islam.
What have the SoA done since the last Crusade to bring the ummah out of the dark ages?
The KKK in the U.S. is finished—bankrupt. It was destroyed financially via legal suits by the Southern Poverty Law Center.Landmark KKK Lawuits here.
The SPLC is an excellent place to learn as to what is being done in the U.S. regarding hate, intolerance and discrimination.
http://www.splcenter.org/
And yes, isn't it a GREAT thing that a man such as the powerful Trent Lot was forced to resign for his racist remarks! When will such a thing happen in the Islamic world? Perhaps Muslims could start a "Muslim Poverty Law Center" and sue the perpetrators of intolerance and hatred within their societies. Certainly that would keep an army of attorneys gainfully employed for a life-time.
As to being the "sons of God" If one believes that God is the creator of men then it follows that we are all the "children of that God." The free West has a problem with the Islamic concept of humans being "slaves of Allah."
As to using the term the "sons of Allah" (for which Oriana Fallaci must be credited in her book "The Rage and The Pride") I felt it might be less annoying to some than saying Muslims or SOBs. If you like, we could substitute either in the next, edited, version of the article. ;-)
"History is full of ups and downs, but it shows arrogance is sign of ignorance!"
Absolutely! And nothing is more ignorant or arrogant than a SoA who believes that the Qur'an is a peaceful document that was inspired by God, and that the Islamic nation is “the best of peoples,” when all evidence, particularly in the modern era, points to the contrary.
As AIS said, "Islam is the religion of pieces," those pieces are body parts. The Qur'an is a war manual with a great majority of it dedicated to instructions on how to subjugate the "unbelievers" and how to attain war booty including slaves for Islam. Here we have Chapter 48 of the Qur'an:
AL-FATH (VICTORY, CONQUEST)
Total Verses: 29
Revealed At: MADINA
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/048.qmt.html#048.001
There is nothing comparable in any other Holy book, particularly those of the monotheistic religions.
Wessie
["Well, I read it;" you might say, "now let's close it!"]I guess you did not find the article funny, huh, Medhi? ;-)
Medhi, please specify EXACTLY what is incorrect or untruthful about the article instead of using generalities. It would be good if you posted supporting documentation to substantiate your claims.
BTW, the author's name is Alexandra. Alexandria is a city in Egypt.
How do you know what sorts of news programs the author watches or what sorts of articles the author reads? Thus far supporting documentation has been from Islamic sources and not CNN, FOX or Mr. Friedman.
Wessie
Just for a clarification:
Jerusalem was taken by the caliph Umar in the 7th cent. First Crusade started in 1096 (i.e. about 400 years after the invasion of Jerusalem).
And also read this (from www.encyclopedia.com):
Late in the 11th cent., Byzantine Emperor Alexius I , threatened by the Seljuk Turks, appealed to the West for aid. This was not the first appeal of the kind; while it may have helped to determine the time and the route of the First Crusade, 1095-99, its precise import is difficult to estimate. Direct impetus was given the crusade by the great speech of Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont (now Clermont-Ferrand) in 1095. Urban exhorted Christendom to go to war for the Sepulcher, promising that the journey would count as full penance and that the homes of the absent ones would be protected by a truce. The battle cry of the Christians, he urged, should be "Deus volt" [God wills it]. From the crosses that were distributed at this meeting the Crusaders took their name. Bishop Ademar of Le Puy-en-Velay was designated as papal legate for the crusade, and Count Raymond IV of Toulouse was the first of the leaders of the expedition to take the cross.
Don't you see a similarty between Pope Urban II speech and todays hardliner mullas calling for a Holly war?
Stinging and funny--truth, that is. Well said, Alexandra!
Danke Azad.
God's will, God's gift, God's present, liberty delivery 24/7 ...
Just stopped by to see what's going on in FToI. Since can't handle a lot of crap today, just browsed the *names* of comment-writers. Found Tautologist's quote refreshing, maybe just for the simple reason that it is written in a language that *I* can read and enjoy, but the writer of this entry cannot. :-> Gotta go...
The writer (Alexandra) has proved her ignorance and nothing more. Her anger has dominated the article and one gets nothing out of it but some hateful remarks about Islam. The article is more to soothe the anger of some people like Wessie and AIS against Islam and has no other value.
The biggest mistake of the writer;
Calling muslims by the name "sons of Allah" is her worst mistake that reveals her ignorance about the most fundamental principle of Islam which is Tawheed.
1. Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
2. Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
3. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
4. And there is none like unto Him.
(Surah Ikhlas)
If she doesn't know about this first principle of Islam, then how can we give any credit to the rest of her article which is supposedly about Islam?
She writes:
"Unlike our adolescents, the sons of Allah don't want us to look "cool" to keep us from embarrassing them down at the mall in front of their friends."
Muslims must do their best to look cool. Prophet said: "Allah is beautiful and loves beauty." One of Allah's names is "Beautiful". Beautiful things are signs of Allah SWT and we pay attention to them not only by our eyes but by our hearts and in any beautiful thing or person, we see Allah's beauty and we praise him for creating this beautiful world; he has created everything in perfection:
95:4 We have indeed created man in the best of moulds.
It is the right of our body upon us to look after our body and keep ourselves in good shape and good health. It's the right of our brothers upon us to look good in front of them and please them by our look and good manners. Prophet SAW before going out of home used to look at himself at the mirror and say: "O Allah! You beautified my look, so beautify my manners too."
She writes:
"Like all teens, the sons of Allah claim they know "everything!" EVERYTHING one needs to know is contained in the "perfect" Qur'an and the hadith from nuclear physics to how to cut one's finger nails—i.e., like this: " . . . start from the right index finger to the right small finger then the right thumb. Thereafter, the left hand from the small finger to the thumb. Cutting of the toe nails will be from the small left toe to the small right toe." (Mirqaat vol.2 pg.45) and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best” "
Please notice that it was 1400 years ago when prophet SAW talked about cutting the nails. Though clippin the nails is amongst the teachings of prophet, I didn't find any hadith about the order of clipping one's nail in the 6 authentic books of hadith.
Islam is indeed a completed and perfected path to Allah SWT. This doesn't mean that we can find the answer to all our questions directly from the primary sources of Islam. The answers to questions regarding nuclear physics, as the writer suggests, cannot be found in Quran or Hadith. Prophet Mohammad SAW and the companions or the Salaf never claimed that all questions can be answered by Islam.
She also writes:
"On the six-o-clock news, day after day, we watch in bemused bewilderment incessant reruns of the writhing, screeching, spitting sons of Allah, with toothless open mouths..."
This reveals her sources of knowledge (i.e. the six-o-clock news); this shows the huge impact of media in distorting the image of Islam in America. But still thousands of americans manage to find out the truth by themselves and revert to Islam, the religion that they had at the time of birth.
"Toothless open mouths" is the phrase that catches my eyes.
Abu Hurairah (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "Had I not thought it difficult for my Ummah, I would have commanded them to use the Miswak (tooth-stick) before every Salat.''
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
He himself used to brush his teeth with Miswak before every prayer. Even in his death bed, he asked for his Miswak and he brushed and brushed untill his hands couldn't hold the Miswak anymore. The ignorance about Islam is not limited to westerners; the majority of muslims are also ignorant about the teachings of Islam.
She continues with her slanderous tone:
"Like any adolescents, the sons of Allah are hormone impaired and sex obsessed."
We would like to ask the writer to please bring forward your proof if you are telling the truth. We would like ot know what exactly makes her think so.
And am I allowed to say that americans are even more sex-obsessed? Women are 'used' and 'abused' in american culture to sell products and please men in all forms. Just who are the most famous people in America and why they are famous? Sexual immorality has brought this society to a boiling point. The most high profile cases in american 'justice' system are sex-related:
- Kobe Bryant's case
- Micahle Jackson's case
- Pedofile priests case
- Clinton's case
- Laci Peterson's case
Such people have no right to blame other people for being sex-obsessed, even if they are.
She writes:
"In the mean time, they are "doing it," behind the tent with the sanction of a little thing called "temporary marriage,” to anything that is moving from nine to twenty-five. After that, women are too old anyway and only good for being recycled for 72 raisins in Paradise."
Temporary marriage is much better and more humane than the kinds of relationships we see in the west. In temp. marriage, the woman has rights and the terms of the contract are clear and known to both sides. Having said this, temp. marriage is practice rarely, only amongst specefic group of people in Shiite sect of Islam. Even in Iran, the largest Shiite land, it is not practiced amongst middle class. Any person who had researched this matter with an opne mind could see this, but our dear writer is anything but open-minded.
The believing women are the best treasures in paradise. They are the most beautiful creatures in paradise and their beauty is far higher than the beauty of hoors. Not only that, their beauty is increased by Allah's power:
Anas (May Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "In Jannah there is a market to which the people will come every Friday. The northern wind will blow and shower fragrance on their faces and clothes and, consequently, it will enhance their beauty and loveliness. They will then return to their wives who will also have increased in their beauty and loveliness, and their families will say to them: `We swear by Allah that you have been increased in beauty and loveliness since leaving us.' Thereupon they will reply: `We swear by Allah that you have also been increased in beauty and loveliness since we left you.'''
[Muslim].
In a narration Umm Salama (a wife of prophet Mohammad SAW) asks our beloved prophet:
`O Nabi (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam), are the women of this world superior or the hurs?' He replied, `The women of this world will have superiority over the hurs just as the outer lining of a garment has superiority over the inner lining.' Umm-e-Salma (Radhiallaahu Anha) then asked, `O Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam), what is the reason for this?' He answered, `Because they performed Salaat, fasted and worshipped Allah. Allah will put light on their faces and silk on their bodies. (the human women) will be fair in complexion and will wear green clothing and yellow jewellery. Their incense burners will be made of pearls and their combs will be of gold. They will say, `We are the women who will stay forever and we will never die. We are the women who will always remain in comfort and we will never die. We are the women who will always remain in comfort and we will never undergo difficulty. We are the women who will stay and we will never leave. Listen, we are happy women and we will never become sad. Glad tidings to those men for whom we are and who are for us.'
She further reveals her ignorance:
"One cannot deny that the veil certainly does solve the "what to wear" dilemma if one only has one sack in one color—black—simple."
Burqa is not an obligation. Muslim women from different cultures are wearing the most stylish modest clothes. Most muslim women in Turkey, Egypt and Iran don't practice Burqa. They don't need to show off their skin to other men to attract their attention; they are much higher than that. At the same time, in their traditions, they have colorful and beautiful designs and anyone who has researched different ethnicities (for example Kurds) in the Middle East could have seen this point; but our writer is anything but a researcher.
She seems also ignorant of recent confessions of Colin Paul and writes:
"And of course, like any kid, the sons of Allah insist on their right to obtaining things that are dangerous, such as WMDs, long before they are mature enough to handle these; shrieking and demonstrating that "everybody" else has them, especially the highly precocious Jewish neighbor kid, the one who consistently wins the science prizes and plays the violin to boot."
What WMD? The Bush administration has overtly confessed that it was a lie; they took America into a deadly war based on a lie and didn't even bother (as Michale Moore said) to forge some documents and justify their lie. No as long as there are some americans like Alexandra, no need to justify anything; you say it in the six-o-clock news and they believe it. You say 'be' in the six-o-clock news and it 'is'.
And at the end she wishfully says:
"In the mean time, we'll just have to lock you all in your room."
No way Miss! Locking us does you no good. You may be able to lock human beings in their rooms but you cannot silence the cry of masses and the cry of the truth. The truth stands for itself. Islam is already here shining in America. There are six million of your countrimen who are muslims, who believe in Quran and Hadith, the way I do. I have seen stronger and more sincere muslims in American than anywhere else I have been to. They are six million strong and they are growing. Are you going to lock all of them too?
["Well, I read it;" you might say, "now let's close it!"]I am really worried about America if the most strong and sincere Muslims are living there.
Case for applying for my Japanese immigration maybe.
By the way there are 10 million muslims in France. That is the country with a real problem not US, I think.
No, Azad, I don't see "a similarty between Pope Urban II speech and todays hardliner mullas calling for a Holly war?"
What I see is the history that Islam burst out of Arabia with violence, just as it says to do in the Qur'an, and conquered lands where it had no business being—the Holy Land and Iran as well. The First Crusade was called to get the Holy Land back from the Muslims. In other words the Muslim STOLE the Holy Land just as they STOLE so many other places they occupy today—like Iran.
What right do hardline mullahs have to call "holy war"? Who has taken anything away from them? The West, particularly the U.S. has helped Muslims all over the world. It was Islam that attacked the West on 9/11 and many times before that, and not vice versa!
---
No time now to answer dear Hajir. But, just for his clarification, the article is not a research article, otherwise there would have been references, it is humorous. ;-)
I need to get into one of those decadent, little Western dresses, one that shows lots of skin and meet old friends for dinner. Being a thoroughly western woman, and very competitive, I have no problem if a Muslimah wants to make herself look ugly in a shroud—however "stylish and colorful." Because, that makes the rest of us normal people look better. ;-)
I look forward to seeing all sorts of interesting people of both genders, of many ethnicities and cultures in the restaurant, dressed to the nines or not as they wish, having a wonderful time together. People will greet each other with handshakes, kisses and hugs. Men and women in love will be holding hands and touching each other across the table in public. They will also be drinking alcohol with their food. After dinner we shall all go dancing in a place where more alcohol is served. Imagine, people of opposite genders writhing together on the dance floor, sweating to the pulsating beat. Who knows what can happen after that. . . ;-)
Wessie
I should congratulate US media for their effective transformation of US to a BLIND nation.
As for your hatred, I left a more complete comment in “WHEN WILL YOU BE CLEARED?” to address your criticism in some details. In short you need to consider the US role (and its father, small Britain) in the transformation of Middle East to what it is now.
As I explained in that comment, which I referred to here, radicalization of Iran is partly due to your coup in 1953 and the vacuum it created. It was then that the tree of hatred started growing and it takes time and effort on your side to take out the tree from its roots and the reinterpretation of Quran or “burning” it will not help in that regard.
You also gave birth to Al Quada for the “holy” cause of fighting the “evil” communism. And if they try to get nuclear bomb, it’s because their father (in the context of your analogy) is a drunk monster that can’t be trusted!
One necessary part of the resolution for the problems in the Middle East is to quarantine US! Unfortunately the cow is too big to be quarantined easily.
Wessie, keep up with the hatred. It does show nothing but your ignorance and ….
Let me be clear that I don’t want to answer you and I think you don’t deserve to get an answer. This is just to give another perspective to the readers of this website.
Dear Mr.Wessie,
I'm not at all a kind of person who rifles through Holy Books to find some evidence that they don't match the modern life. But since you are interested in these kind of things I've put together a humble list which may be invigorating when you want to surmonize for Jewish brothers :
1. Stoning for Blasphemy:
"Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death." (Leviticus 24:16)
2. Death Penalty for murder :
"You shall not take a ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death" (Numbers 35:31).
3. Eye to Eye :
"And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him. Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again." (Leviticus 24:19-20)
4. Adultery :
"If a man commits adultery with the wife of another man, both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death" (Leviticus 20:1).
5. Polygamy :
Although the Torah implies that monogamy is the preferred and ideal state, both the Tanakh and the Talmud allow polygamy.
Again don't get me wrong, it's just FYI (Wessie) corresponding your field of research.
As my post was pointless, this comment is aimless. No talking to anybody. No shooting at nobody. Just thinking aloud. And apology if I'm not that gentle...
I don't think nobody gains no shit from kicking others' ass. Why not just be friends and enjoy the disagreement?
It's simple. You push somewhere, I tell ya it hurts, does it not seem humane, rationale, cool or fuckever not to push it again? It's easy to laugh at, be it american girls in Italy or toothless boys in Iraq. It's even easier to call somebody ignorant, be it Christian or Muslim or Jew. And it's the easiest to make any of these mad. But why?
And just one more thing, History has far better functions than proving each others' guilt with or finding the shit out of it to throw at each others' face. Why not just enjoy reading it?
It seems to me that Alexandra's hatred against Muslims is mainly fueled by her perception of Muslims being these dangerous creatures who are lining up for killing Americans. This picture is well aligned with what one can get from public media here: from the angry Muslims in Pakistan who are shouting against the U.S. to Palestinian young children who put on explosive belts and kill innocent Israelis, they all confirm this picture.
I think there is some truth in this picture, many of us coming from Iran have experienced the kind of intolerance that extremists can nurture into blind violence. Yet, I also believe this is a very biased picture, as it ignores all the diversity that exists among different Muslims, painting everybody with the same brush. This is where Borghan’s example of counting KKK as what is U.S. makes the point. There is a lot to be said on this regard, but let me just give the example of international terrorism:
Do you think Muslims are the main source of international terrorism and Americans the main target? If so, you are wrong! Looking at the patterns of global terrorism in the world, neither middle east comes up to be in the first place for abundance of terrorism (in fact it hardly gets to third or forth place among 7 regions of the world), nor U.S. has a significant share of victims of terrorism (except for 2001). The state department report on patterns of global terrorism gives a good overview on this issue (check out the statistical overview for a quick summary):
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2002/html/
The report does not provide the data to correlate between the religion and terrorism, yet, I suspect from the regional trends provided, that the per person share of Muslims in doing terrorist activities is not higher than any other religious groups. In fact even if that was not the case (i.e. Muslims had the highest rate of terrorist act among different religious groups), one could not label hundreds of millions of peaceful Muslims as terrorist. This is the type of generalization that we can see in Alexandra’s article, as well as in stereotypes about Muslims in the U.S.
One a more personal note, many of us in this forum have suffered similar hatred caused by intolerance and blind generalizations that viewed us in our country as dangerous infiltrators from the west, hippies and punks, or plain infidels. That is why I see an ironic parallelism between the views of people like Wessie and Muslim hardliners she claims to hate. Here is the subtle point: The decisive line is not between Muslims and non-muslims, the line of separation is between those who believe in tolerance, dialogue and understanding of differences, and those who don’t!
Salam Pax has a nice paragraph which is worth quoting here:
"And Salam wanted that as well. When you get pushed into a corner because of a name and a place of birth you try to make the best out of the corner you have been pushed into. And believe me being pushed into the corner labeled [young male of Middle Eastern / Muslim origin] hasn’t been much fun lately. But since it is all you have you dig deeper into it and hold on to it. The current western world view has antagonized a huge number of people, the West wasn’t that interested in dialogue. We were simply labeled as Muslim terrorist.
One of the more amusing results of this has been my friend’s G arrest by American soldiers while he was on a job for an American Newspaper. He was given the head-sack and an angry soldier shouted at him “it was you [your type] who attacked the world trade center”. Now this is funny because G. is so pro-American it gets to me sometimes, he is Christian (but he hates it when you tell him that because he really is “agnostic”), so why did the soldier accuse him of attacking the World Trade Center? Because he had a Muslim looking beard and looked “of mid-eastern origin”. "
Wessie,
I don't understand how you missed the point of my comment twice in a row :) Instead of blaming you for it, I am going to assume that my point wasn't made clear enough. While I don't think the analogy you used was particularly insightful in any way, I was following up on the analogy you made (Good mature America as parent, deliquent, muslim adolescents as the teenage sons to be spanked and disciplined). With that analogy, I was pointing out to the fact that maybe it was the parents (good old USA) who through their abusive relationship with their children made them into the deliquent, adolscents that they are now. Anyway, given that you didn't get it, don't worry about it too much.
Some random days in reverse chronological order
July 3, 1988
September 11, 1973
August 19, 1953
August 9, 1945
August 6, 1945
Ali, I did not miss your point. I simply am NOT buying it. You and your friends want to blame everything on the U.S. and the West like recalcitrant adolescents. Have you not noticed that no one is buying it except perhaps the Chomskeyites?
The reason I posted the article "Child to Killer" from the Iranian is because the author blames your cultures and Islam–just as the rest of the world does. Making the U.S. an "abusive" parent is a cop out. When will your people grow up and take responsibility for themselves and their actions? The U.S. has acknowledged that supporting the theocratic rulers of Islam was not good. When will you all acknowledge that you are responsible for those who lead you? You, yourself, Ali wrote an article to that effect here:
http://freethoughts.org/archives/000238.html
Ali Mahani at November 2, 2003 08:30 AM: "No, don’t give me that crap “ It’s the Iranian government, not the people”… The bunch of thieves and tarts running this country were brought to power by no-one but the PEOPLE, and the same people should have the courage to pull their heads out of their collective arses and take responsibility for their acts:
You folks constantly speak of hatred. I have never once in my life used the world "hate" against any race or ethnic group. You interpret criticism of your cultures and Islam as hatred. It is simply criticism. You all criticize the U.S. and the West with impunity. Yet, we are not sending terrorists all over the world to target innocents. We don't send female suicide jihadis to deliberately stand next to baby carriages and blow ourselves up. But, Muslims do that.
BTW—Salam Pax has lost his "lustre" in the West. We realize that he is clearly an opportunist. There are far better Iraqi bloggers.
We in the West believe in tolerance and diaglogue. The problem is that Islamic nations have no clue how to do that. The West is labeled as debauched and decadent and that is all you see—yet, you all want to come here anyway. One wonders about all the innovations, the developments the inventions that the West has made, which the Middle East and the rest of the world gladly use—why do you all forget about those things? Without those things, ALL developed in the West, modern life would not be possible! What EXACTLY have Muslims produced in the lasts 500 years except more of the same—Islamic terror?
Mamadali, quoting the Bible is plain silly given that no one stones people any longer in any other culture except Islam. Polygamy may be "permitted" but, you'd be hard pressed in the civilized world to find it. It certainly is not legal as all of the above are in the Islamic world. Ditto for any of the other quotes. The only religion that is still in the 7th century is Islam! The rest have had a reformation and are living with their modernized religions in the modern world.
Saeed, you claim we are responsible for al Qaeda!? Now that is a bit of a stretch. Do you remember the Muslim Brotherhood?
The blame game will only get you more of the same— disdain from the world. You may believe that there is a lot of anti-Americanism in the world and that may be so. But, you can see by the security measures implemented worldwide that people and their governments are much more concerned about Islamic extremism that anti-Americanism. You can see by the articles being written, the Islamic terror funding trails being shut down, the Islamic terrorists being arrested that Muslims are not exactly the “favorite son” at this time in history. Muslims SCREAM constantly that no one “understands” them. That people are “ignorant” about Islam. Well, we are NOT ignorant. We know plenty! And we don’t like what we see. The Qur’an is a war manual. Not a book of religious peace.
You can run, but you cannot hide. In the end you will have to face that YOU are responsible for Islamic terrorism, you, your cultures and your religion—and not the rest of the world or the West. Arabs/Muslims breed terror, they teach hatred and intolerance in their schools, mosques and madrassas, they fund it, they support it via zakat, they export it to the rest of the world. There is plenty of proof of that. Even Muslims in the U.S. have a terror funding trail:
How U.S. extremists fund terror http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36441
The facts are that Iran has funded and supported international Islamic terror, and they are now seeking another Islamic bomb; so have Syria, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia and many other Muslim states. Pakistan has the nuclear bomb already and sold its stolen knowledge to both N. Korea and Libya. What do you think will happen once these terror-supporting states get nuclear weapons? Do you think that Muslims will be safe from other Muslims?
As to painting all with one brush—No one has ever said that ALL Muslims are terrorists. However, ALL Islamic terrorists are Muslims! At some point Muslims must admit that the Islamofascists are following Islam to the letter. It is the rest who don't know their religion very well who are not following Islam.
Here is what Ali said: ". . . I believe that any real Iranian with a valid claim to patriotism is supposed to put his shoulder to the wheel and work for his country for all he is worth. You can’t run away from your own land t go and squat on your neighbour’s—leaving your fellow countrymen to their fate. A grown-up man must grit his teeth and share in whatever is coming to his country, rather than trying to save his own skin by stooping to all kinds of humiliations to get a visa. . . "
Many people read this website; many of them are westerners. With the sorts of attitudes you present here: from whining about “discrimination” in the West, especially the U.S. to blaming us instead of yourselves for Islamic terrorism do you really think you will endear yourselves to the free world? Do you really think anyone will ever believe you?
Question to you all. Exactly what is the Islamic world responsible for? For what will they take responsibility— for anything? Or is the fact that your societies are failed societies all "daddy's" fault?
Kids who constantly get “bailed out” by “daddy” become emotional and social cripples who can never function independently.
Free lunch is over. Time for Tough Love!
Wessie
["Well, I read it;" you might say, "now let's close it!"]I just want to go on record as saying that I, for one, am a big fan of Shalwar and Kameez. There is not a more flattering, utilitarian, comfortable, well-designed type of apparel anywhere in the world at any time in history. As the engineers say, it is elegant. I would happily wear nothing but S&K for the rest of my life. In fact, I do wear a clumsy imitation every day to work (medical scrubs). Most of the utility, none of the charm. I don't believe Muslims universally HATE our clothes. All the ones I know personally are far more discerning than any American I ever met. In fact, now that I think of it, an Afghani taught me pretty much everything I know about dressing well. Subtle things, like putting together colors to make sale items look "designer." I think generally people who identify themselves primarily by their religion object to a certain style of dress, lets call it "Pamela Anderson," (and they are not the only ones), but are Muslims any worse than Mormons, or the Amish? I took my kids to a Greek Orthodox Monastery last weekend, and we all had to wear headscarves,long skirts, and jackets to cover our arms. We were uncomfortable, and finally had to leave because the kids couldn't stand the scarves any more, but even the 9 year old understood it was a gesture of respect. It's only in my own religion, Catholicism that there is absolutely no dress code, dress hasn't been mentioned since the 60's. Any other time in my life I've attended some kind of religious ceremony I've received instructions on what is or is not acceptable to wear. I was a reader at a Bat Mitzvah last Spring and I was informed 4 times that I had to cover my arms. My point is, something about religion doesn't like any emphasis on the body. Or maybe it's just the patriarchal religions, trying to eliminate distractions.
AW the point of the article, aside from being funny, regarding clothes is that many Muslims are constantly trying to impose their values on the rest of the world while denigrating ours. So, they claim our women dress like "whores" because we prefer to reveal skin—and they want us to cover up. That's all fine for them. But NOT for us!
I say, don't come to the West and impose your values on us. No "infidel" can go to any Islamic land and dress as he wants. If we travel to a Muslim country we have to wear a scarf at the least and a full abaya or burqa at worst. Why should Muslims dictate to the world what we can wear? Why should Muslims in an Islamic land demonstrate for the hijab in the West. It is NONE of their business what Western laws are! We don't have people demonstrating in our streets that our women have to wear hijab (against our customs) in Islamic lands.
I know women who have traveled in the Middle East and have been spat at by men and women because they did not dress "appropriately." Can you imagine if someone did that in the West to a veiled Muslim woman? They would be SCREAMING "racism" again.
There is a difference between wearing modest clothing in a house of worship and being dictated to as to what one can wear on the street or even at home. What good is Shalwar Kameez, Caftan or whatever if one has to wear a sack over these?
Hajir imagines that Muslim women dress in hijab voluntarily because they are "higher" than Western women. That is not always the case. In Iran young women are rebelling as much as they dare. They wear as little as possible under the chador and let their hair peek out. Sometimes they get beaten for it.
"At the parties I go to I see girls wearing very open clothes - short skirts and low-cut evening tops," Parisa says. . .
"Today's young people want freedoms in line with what the young have everywhere else in the world. Because they are denied that we are a society in crisis," she says. .. ."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3053383.stm
Iran has been "locked in a room" for several decades now. They are ready to burst out. It is just a matter of time.
What gives Muslim men the right to impose 7th century mores on their women and even presume to do the same to non-Muslim women?
"Malaysian city rules on women"
"The Islamic government in the Malaysian city of Kuala Terengganu has laid down strict new laws about what non-Muslim women can wear to work.
The rules, which ban even moderately revealing clothing, are an unprecedented attempt to impose the party's values on the personal lives of non-believers in Malaysia. . .
. . .Even non-Muslims will be banned from wearing short sleeved blouses, tight jeans, skirts with slits, or skirts cut above the knee.
Muslim women will have to wear a tudong, a headscarf drawn tightly about the face. . .
. ..
The state government has decided to close down karaoke lounges and snooker halls and to bar Muslims from all premises where liquor is sold. . .
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3368115.stm
---
After much protest the law for more "modest" clothing for non-Muslim women has been lifted. But, you can bet that they will try it again at a later time.
Clothes Nazis, that's what Muslim men are! ;-)
Wessie!
Go get a life!
Get a hold of yourself woman!
Best Wishes,
Lisa S.
Hajir,
"Islam is indeed a completed and perfected path to Allah SWT."
Does that also include slavery which Islam endorsed. And don't give me 'the situation at the time' thing, because you just said it was a complete and perfect path. Besides somehow 'the situation' did allow banning something as harmless and natural as drinking alcohol, including wine which in all other monotheistic religions,including Zoroastrianism if you accept it as one, has a religious significance. But slavery was OK? This is perfection?!
What about genocide? (a la the tribe of bani quradha for example), political asassination (Kaab), or having sex witha nine year old? They are signs of a perfect path to God? How about kissing a meteorite and walking round it, a bit pagan don't you think?
(Sorry Hajir for picking on you all the time, you at least present verses and evidence. The other guy, Saeed just says how much he has read the Koran nd that it is so peaceful and democratic, but for some reason others who have read it through history, including its own experts Mullahs and Muftis and the like who spend their life time studying the very same Quran miss what Saeed sees so clearly. So I simply ignor his baseless remarks. :) )
Mamadali Hafsman,
Indeed the Tanakh is FULL of such things, but even before the middle ages many of it were considered banned to be practiced by the Rabbis. You know, those 'bad guys' who have this bad habit of changing the words of the 'merciful' God. Stoning ahs not been practiced for even before the birth of Islam. It is an on going culture. Those parts are very old, have you read the laws of Hammurabi as well? The Islamic one is practiced to this very day in our Iran, buddy.
Muyhammad and Islam, unlike the mythological beginnings of the Bible, belong to politicl history and that is not disputable. Islam is unchangable, remember?
Wessie: "You, yourself, Ali wrote an article to that effect here:
http://freethoughts.org/archives/000238.html
Ali Mahani at November 2, 2003 08:30 AM: "No, don’t give me that crap ...
There seems to be a bit of a mix-up here. It was me (Ali Mahani) who wrote that article, while the person you are replying to is named Ali Mostashari. I haven't taken part in the present discussion of "Tough Love and Gloabl Adolescents".
With regards,
Ali Mahani
I don't see the concept of brotherhood here, Wessie. I feel the brotherhood with AlQuada as much as I feel brotherhood with Sharon. This presentation of the concept of brotherhood by itself shows how deep your understanding of Islam is.
AIS, I have come up with a lot of evidences during my other comments ,the most recent one, “EBADI RECONSIDERED” and I explained quite thoroughly why your understanding is wrong (=SIMPLISTIC).
I think Wessie is talking about the Muslim Brotherhood organization that existed in Egypt well before the new generations of Islamic Terrorism...
See for yourself, from Wikipedia.
United States ARMED the group that we call now AlQuada. That's a historical FACT. A very recent one!
You can also trace back the foundation of Muslim Brotherhood to see how British policies at the time fostered Islamic fundamentalism.
Wessie,
Why don't you use your real name, and give a real bio. "Westland" for sure is not your real last name, or is it?
All the authors on free thoughts do so. They are not afraid of using their real name, give they real occupation. It gives their post more creadibility.
I am sure you are not afraid of taking responsibility for your ideas. By the way, have you also travelled to Middle East?
AIS,
I understand your points and I cannot claim that I know all things about Islam. It's a matter of belief and disbelief. When I believe in Allah and his messenger, then I believe in whatever that is presented to me through Allah's book and the messenger's words and actions.
About each one of the points you mentioned, numerous books have been written.
I try to comment on some of your remarks.
Slavery:
Yes Islam accepts slavery in a very limited form. The majority of scholars believe that taking slaves is only allowed during war against the enemy; During such times, muslims are allowed to take the enemy soldiers as slaves. An example is to use them as work forces in prisons or elsewhere. But in any case slaves have great rights upon the masters (for example the government or the owner if they are sold to the public; the latter case is very unlikely in present times because of the dangerous consequences); Having said this, if the islamic state signs an agreement (for example international conventions), then it has to follow the items in that agreement and Islam has never said that it is obligatory to treat the soldiers as slaves; a popular example is when prophet SAW freed the enemy soldiers in condition they would teach 10 muslims how to read and write. So the point is simple: Slavery is allowed but limited to international agreements. It was an unwritten law in 1400 years ago that people would take the enemy as slaves. The law is different now; it may change 1000 years from now; Islam is for all ages. Islam doesn't say slavery is forbidden because there may come times where slavery is practiced again. We don't know what direction this world is taking.
This is what prophet has said about slaves:
Abu Hurairah (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "The faithful and diligent slave will have a double reward.'' (Abu Hurairah added:) By Him in Whose Hand the soul of Abu Hurairah is! but for Jihad in the Cause of Allah, and Hajj and kindness to my mother, I would have preferred to die as a slave.
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
i.e. when a slave prays, his reward is twice a free muslim's prayer. Mohammad SAW said so to honour the slaves and higher their status in the eyes of the community.
Also:
Abu Ali Suwaid bin Muqarrin (May Allah be pleased with him) said: I was the seventh child of Banu Muqarrin and we had only one slave-girl. When the youngest of us once happened to slap her (on the face) the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) ordered us to set her free.
[Muslim].
Subhanallah!
Abu Mas`ud Al-Badri (May Allah be pleased with him) said: I was beating my slave with a whip when I heard a voice behind me which said: "Abu Mas`ud! Bear in mind...'' I did not recognize the voice for the intense anger I was in. Abu Mas`ud added: As he came near me, I found that he was the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) who was saying, "Abu Mas`ud! Bear in mind that Allah has more dominance upon you than you have upon your slave.'' Then I said: "I will never beat any slave in future.''
Qardawi writes: "
During the period of jahiliyyah some people used to exact a daily tribute from their female slaves without caring in what manner they earned this money to pay their masters. A majority of them had to resort to prostitution; some masters even forced their slave-girls to prostitution in order to earn a paltry fee. When Islam came, it lifted this disgraceful burden from its sons and daughters. Allah Ta'ala revealed, ...And do not force your slave-girls to prostitution if they desire chastity, in order that you may seek the pleasures of this world's life.... (24:33)"
Islam abolished many of wrong treatments against slaves and considered "freeing a slave" as a good deed and many times as a compensation for sins. Islam established a systematic way to abolish slavery and that is to free a slave under a specefic contract between the master and the slave. For example the master may agree to work for 5 years and then attain his freedom after that:
And the Messenger of Allah (peace be on him) said, There are three who have a right to the help of Allah: the one who marries out of the desire to live a chaste life, the slave whose master has agreed to his buying his freedom when he wishes to pay the sum, and the one who fights in the cause of Allah. (Reported by Ahmad, al-Nisai, al-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, and al-Hakim.)
Anyways, slavery is not practiced amongst muslims nowadays; according to international laws, that muslim countries have also signed, people cannot take slaves from wars either. So this question is settled untill a time comes when the world finds a new face. And Allah knows best. Islam defenitly doesn't look for such a time to come, but as a universal message for all times, it is ready to confront any situation at any time.
Alcohol is prohibited in Islam. Alcohol, as Quran puts it, has benefit in it but its harm is more than its benefit. We cannot say alcohol is harmless for three reasons, I think:
1. Many car accidents happen because of drinking alcohol.
2. Many sexual assaults on women have happened after having them drink alcohol.
3. It can bring addiction.
Many lives have been ruined by alcohol. We cannot call it harmless. Maybe you are talking about drinking little alcohol once in a while in a ceremony or whatever; but even those small occasions can lead to trouble. Islam closes the door of trouble from the beginning and bans alcohol, though it may be used in special cases in treating diseases (if such a thing is possible). A stupid momentary short pleasure is not worth the risks (if you look at the society as whole body); instead one can drink from what Allah has allowed us, from the numerous healthy drinks that are far better for health than alcohol.
Bani Quraydhah betrayed muslims. They had a treaty with muslims and they worked against muslims in practice. They were treated according to Torah where it describes the punishment for those who have betrayed their treaty. Women and children were taken as slaves and adult males were slaughtered; that was the rule of Torah and they were treated justly according to their holy book.
Political assasination is practiced even in today's world. It happened in Islam one or two times. Even americans are thinking of allowing such assasinations by law, though they have done it secretly in the past. There are cases where the national security of a nation is at stake and people don't compromise in such cases. Insulting prophet Mohammad SAW (as the sole symbol of the nation) was a threat to the nation of Islam (the Ummah) and by his direct order the threat was eradicated.
Sex with a nine-year-old was not a crime in Arabia. Mohammad SAW was the best in good morals and a leader for muslims. Muslims didn't see his marriage with Ayesha a bad thing; it was quite normal in those days. Secondly there are different narrations regarding Ayesha's age at the time of marriage. Some historians have recorded her age 14 at the time of marriage.
And eventually Ayesha lived a happy life with Mohammad SAW; in numerous narrations that she narrated after his death, he transmitted her knowledge from Prophet to the Ummah, as a young woman, she was the first Mujtahid, a person who was respected a lot by scholars and they would attend her classes to learn about Islam. Nowhere she complains about the age difference between her and prophet. She always mentioned him by good words. It seems nobody cares what Ayesha felt for Mohammad SAW and we just hear you and people like you complaining on her behalf.
Kissing the Hajarul-Aswad. This is a religious ritual. All religions have their rituals. Someone may also laugh at us iranians for making a Haft-Seen table, etc. That stone was respected amongst arabs; prophet wouldn't destroy such a harmless stone. All national symbols must be protected and respected as long as they are compatible with Islam and with its principles. Hence haft-seen is also respected by iranian muslims while keeping a fire at home didn't survive. Having said this, I have no idea what is the significance of Hafarul-Aswad. As a muslim who may go to Hajj (insha allah) I may even don't have a chance to get close to it. It is narrated that Umar while kissing it said: "Oh the black stone! If I had not seen the beloved prophet kissing you, I wouldn't be kissing you."
We respect it because of the respect we have for prophet Mohammad and he knows better than us what that stone is about. If we don't understand something we shouldn't just reject right away. Maybe there is a wisdom behind it; we tolerate it and we will get the answer to all our questions in hereafter.
I am sorry for writing such a long post. All the guidance is from Allah SWT; he guides whoever he wishes and misguides whoever he wishes. There is no protecter but Him; I witness that there is no god but him and that Mohammad SAW is his messenger and Islam is his final message to the human race. He honoured us by his words in Quran and enlightened us through the teaching of Mohammad SAW that has been transmitted by his great companions and the Salaf and the scholars of Islam. The message is delivered and the religion is perfected. We have free choice and only one life.
["Well, I read it;" you might say, "now let's close it!"]Jews went to Palestine, occupied the land, kicked muslims out of their homes, killed many based on something their prophet promissed to them in their book! And they aren't even willing to share the land with muslims! How come that's no alien concept to anyone? A simple analogy, how do you like it if I take over your house and say I had a dream that God promised me your house! Do you guys understand how it feels like to live in tents all your life!? I had a palestinian friend who said he needs to get a visa to go back to his own country!!! How come that's no alien concept to anyone? In my dictionary, Israel is The Occupied Palestine!
Islam does not need any enemy with Hajir-kind of defenders. His logic (if it can be called logic) in justifying slavery is really ridiculous and a disgrace to any muslim. Their trade-mark is using a hadith in every other sentence, as if it can compensate the lack of logic. Even if we accept that one could use a hadith to corroborate his/her story, more than %99.9 of these hadiths are not authentic, most of them are fabricated stories from people who are called Hadith Factory even by many Islamic scholar.
Hajir,
first of all let me say that I personally have great respect for your honesty and the sincerity of your faith, and I am positive that that faith has made a much better person out of you than 90% of the people of this crazy world. You are a good example for Wessie to see the difference between such a general term as muslims, even those who sincerily believe in Islam and Islam itself as what it really is. Had we been living in Switzerland (as we say in Persian) I wouldn't have had any problem with your opinion and worldview including your Islam, however we unfortunately do not live in Switzerland but in a very backward third world country with at least 1600 years of superstition and almost non-stop tyranny that has made it into this infernal wasteland that it is today. For us there is no place for reservation anymore, this thing should be exposed as what it really is and the ugly facts about it brought to the open, even at the cost of insulting the beliefs of people like you. I'm sorry.
I don't think I need to reply to the points you raised any more, except these three:
"It's a matter of belief and disbelief. When I believe in Allah and his messenger, then I believe in whatever that is presented to me through Allah's book and the messenger's words and actions."
That's the problem, isn't it? That is why Renaissence was such a momentous event in human history when a large and ever increasing number of people decided not to do that any more. May I (mis)quote Nietzsche?
'...You hadn't sought yourselves yet when you found me, all believers act thus, That is why belief is so worthless...'
"About each one of the points you mentioned, numerous books have been written. "
I told you a couple of months back that this is the usual mulla sophistry to shy away from problematic issues. I just say this here, for all the points YOU raise against Christianity or Judaism numerous books have been written by their proponents as well, but is that an answer at all?
"Having said this, I have no idea what is the significance of Hafarul-Aswad."
Allow me to help on this and other obscure 'rituals'. :)
read these articles.(chapters III and V were especially illuminating to me.) I also recommend it to everyone else in this site:
http://www.bible.ca/islam/library/Tisdall/Sources/index.htm
But a remark on them before you go. The website is a Christian one and the author is also a Christian. The point is that what these people (and their Islamic and Jewish etc. counterparts) say in FAVOUR of their religion is worthless mumbo-jumbo, but the points they raise AGAINST their rival religions are usually very acute and worth paying attention to. One reason is that they take their faith very seriously and so the points they find on others is for them a matter of (eternal) life and damnation. It is very informative to see how each group exposes the other's weakness (pate-ye hamdigar-raa ruyeh ab miandazand!) especially for those of us who have been through the education system in Iran. The points raised against Christianity and Judaism, the inconsistencies in the Bible etc were actually quite intelligent in general, so seeing the similar one from the other side is very good in keeping the balance in our minds, I think.
(And this is NOT were I have all my views and inforfmations from-I actually just found this yesterday, I usually can't resist sharing what I find interesting to others for a long time.)
Again to every one, many points are EXTREMELY informative and inetersing in these setsof articles. Take a look.
["Well, I read it;" you might say, "now let's close it!"]Saeed,
I know of your detailed remarks. Unfortunately they mean nothing. You mention 'La ekraha fiddin'? and other 'softies'? The explanation is quite easy. They usually belong to the period in Mecca and early period in Medina, where our guy didn't have much POWER and still hoped the Jews would sort of accept him, praying towards Jerusalem, keeping the Yom Kippur fast and the like, you know...things changed when he was rejected and when he attained ever more power. It is almost like a Greek tragedy, the corrupting effects of power.
You say he was always in the defensive? Not true. The first war was waged against a caravan of merchants! forgotten? how about the peace treaty with the Quraysh? He broke it on very silly excuses when he summoned enough power to take the city over. He TOOK OVER the city and his followers took over countries and you say Islam does not impose itself on others? what is this,a joke?
You say Islam does not impose itself but leaves the people with choice?
OK, just answer this. He -Muhammad- ordered the death of many people, including other tribes and
apostates, didn't he? The tribes were in war, as offensives, fine, not true but let's accept that for the sake of argument.
What about that Katib of Vahy who claimed to have changed the verses by himself and that Muhammad hadn't realized it and turned back from Islam and went to Mecca? After the conquest a villain such as Abusufyan was spared, though his 'choice' was obviously only under the threat of death, but this poor guy was orderd specifically to be killed! If there is choice, under what f**ing authority did he give himself the right to take the LIVES of other HUMAN BEINGS? They obviously didn't CHOOSE to be muslims, did they?
What about killing apostates all through its history till today ? What if some unfortunate soul who happend to be born a moslem CHOOSES otherwise, how come they KILL him/her?
You know, nothing of what I said about Hajir includes you. You are neither honest nor really faithful.
You may learn something on reading those links I put above as well.
Wellesley Girl,
Instead of ranting such meaningless mumbo jumbo you might read about some facts for a change.
(sigh) I am really tired of repeating historical facts over and over again here-and I am not even Jewish- but I guess one more round is in order:
Israel is the land of the Jews as well, has been for near 3 thousand years. Palestinian Arabs are there only for a couple of centuries, and a state called Pallestine never existed. (Palestine was the geographical name of the region since the Romans), and nobody destroyed their homes and forced them out of their land. When Isarel declared independence, she made a policy of supporting any similar decleration by the 'Palestinians'. They never made one. All they wanted was to draw the JEW away. And they left by the advice of their other arab brethren, before the six day war, because they were told they would soon return victorious and there was no need for them to stay in the middle of cross fire. They are kept in misery by their arab bothers and vermins like Arafat to gain political advantages and propaganda material against Israel. Now the war is very dirty, but don't forget who started it and who keeps it dirty. There is no symmetry here.
Why don't you read the sources in the net, icluding a real history of Israel or the real Zionist papers by Herzl and the like by yourself, they are a click away , and form your ideas based on what you read from both sides instead of just parroting the rubbish we were and are fed as propaganda, by the regime and before that the leftist ver...sion (be polite AIS, OK? you have apologized enough already... and don't forget to brush your teeth and cut you nails and drink your milk and...OK, I'm ready now) of lies. You do that, OK? Good girl.
(And before you attack the keyboard Wessie, no sexism implied here, I would have said 'Good boy' equally as well if that was the case!)
Just a word of rant before you Muslims all start:
It’s ages since I stopped sending posts and articles into this weblog. [Now it’s so good to see other people (eg, Wessie) with mentalities similar to mine taking over]. But looking at the endless reams of rubbish in the Comments section, I decided to briefly pop out of retirement, put finger to keyboard, and jot down a few blasphemous lines.
The author takes an altogether realistic view of Islam and its precepts, that religion of “tahaarat” (1) and “aftabeh”(2) that we’ve come to be so proud of; calling non-Muslims "dirty" and "impure", sanctioning slavery and racism (i.e., different civil rights for Muslims and non-Muslims) and countless other atrocities I can’t be bothered typing.. . Ms Westland has got some insight into the Muslim’s ways and their collective character, she has no qualms about speaking her mind, and she ain’t one for suffering fools gladly. Keep up the good work, lass, you’ve got it spot on.
(Just remember you aren’t supposed to discuss certain habits of a certain prophet, e.g., the massacre of Jews, enslavement and exploitation of Kuffar,….AND an all-inclusive sexual taste ranging from the almost-infant Ayesha to the Egyptian teen beauty Maarieh, the mature and wealthy Khadija and that old, withered granny Umm Salama).
As for the veil, another ingenious product of Muhammad’s holy mind, I actually wrote a couple of articles on the issue of hijab (the Islamic code of dress) in another forum on this site. They are available at:
http://freethoughts.org/archives/000104.html
The first one is dated [September 9, 2003 03:26 AM], and the second [September 10, 2003 03:38 PM].
Anyway we must notice that the veil was not invented or promulgated by Omar the Tentmaker. It wasn’t even the second caliph Omar ibn Khattaab who introduced the veil, though the latter character is largely responsible for the introduction of the Islamic pestilence into Iran, Egypt and a few other civilised places of that time. Interestingly, the second caliph is known to have banned temporary marriage, a “bid’at” (precedent) that earned him eternal condemnation from the glorious Shiite sect.
The other Omar, better known as Khayyam (the Arabic for tentmaker) was an Iranian poet and mathematician renowned for his love of wine and a blatant disdain for the tenets of Islam. That’s why he is often regarded as an apostate by clerics in this country, and that’s why he became the only poet to win respect and admiration from Iran’s greatest contemporary writer, Sadeq Hedayat.
May their souls rest in peace.
Hedayat (who might be described as the modern Khayyam) has written some very enlightening novels and essays, exposing the true face of Islam and Shiism in Alwiyeh Khanoom (Lady Alwiyeh), Toop-e-Morvary (the Pearl Cannon) and Al Be’sat ol Eslamiyah…(the Islamic Mission to Europe). Highly recommended reading for anyone who wants to know Islam and Iran for what they really are.
Ooof, I’m glad all this is off my chest!
________________________________________________________________
1) Literally: “cleaning” – the Islamic ritual of cleaning your anus after defecation, in the true tradition of the Holy Prophet
2) A sort of jar fitted with a spout, used by Muslims for tahaarat (washing the arsehole)
And this is why we like separation of Church and State.
Ali,
I am spellbound by your courage, man!
But please do be careful, the rope is no joke.
It's always tricky to take statements addressing a specific time and place too many centuries out of context. Muslims certainly aren't the only people in the world at the time of Mohammed's life time "marrying" (or taking into concubinage) girls right from the onset of menses. One society's pedophelia is another society's fight against a high mortality rate among women and infants. Before the 1930's, when antibiotics were invented, childbirth was the number one cause of mortality in women. All those medeval fairy tales of orphans and wicked stepmothers aren't just allegories. It used to be life as we knew it. In fact, my understanding is that one of the initial goals of Islam was to improve the treatment of women, injuntions against abandoning them on hillsides, and that type of thing. Limiting concubines to 4, setting up consequences or fiscal responsibility for divorce. These rules were addressing situations everywhere history was being recorded at that time. Maybe not in Europe, but that may have been becuause not much was recorded there before the Romans.
merican Womn,
"In fact, my understanding is that one of the initial goals of Islam was to improve the treatment of women...."
Well, your understanding is wrong.
Sorry, I meant American Woman.
(the 'A' doesn't work properly in my keyboard.
AW,
Women had a much higher status before Islam in Arabia. Not only a lot of femal deities were worshipped, including the chief two 'couple' Allah (masc) and Al-lat (fem), but women could have asked men for marriage, as Muhammad's first wife actually did, fight battles and have a lot of influence in politics and social life.
Compare that , in 7th century, with tody's Saudi Arabia (or elsewhere where Sharia is in practice) and see for yourself.
Islam is really a curse.
AIS, putting names on things that are there already, will hardly solve anything; it will provide fire for the rhetoric only, which is useful in its proper place, mind you.
Repression of women is a historic part of every global culture on the globe, just look at the distribution of wealth in the US based on sexes, for example.
Now, put these nasty trends in perspective and ask why has the people's attitude towards organized violence against women changed in, say, the US, while it has remained more or less the same in Islamic countries? Is it only that the Western tradition is simply older than the Islamic one?
Women's suffrage and the feminist movements in the West were in this sense very revolutionary and quite recent. In fact if we expect a proper change in the repression of women in the Islamic countries, it would be even more revolutionary!
However, I believe that the most important group of people for overcoming this barrier, are mothers. Look at the role that educated women are playing in educating the society in Iran already. I even believe that the fact that many (male) kids in Tehran have female elementary teachers in the first years of school is a very positive thing in this regard.
For me it's either revolution or education.
I apologize for the dis-arrayed and mistakeful comment. It's just too much snow today.
AIS,
You are WRONG about Israel!
Here are some facts to refresh your mind about Israel!
1) In 1896, Herzel wrote The Jewish State, in which he argued that for Jews assimilation was impossible! The only real solution was a Jewish state. Religious Jews believed that they were not entitled to return to Israel until after God had sent the Messiah!
2) After an abortive revolution in 1905 in Russia, a lot of Jews immigrated to Palestine, most of them would have preferred America but the US strictly limited Jewish immigrants! Palestine was the next choice, partly because Jews were treated better in Muslim countries than the Christian countries.
3) After WW1 the King-Crane commission was dispatched to the former Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire, they stated in their report that first, 90% of Palestine’s inhabitants were non-Jewish and did not want a Jewish state in Palestine. Second, If they (Zionists) are given Palestine, they will complete the disposition of the present non-Jewish inhabitants and finally the commission said that a Jewish state in Palestine would violate the Palestinian’s right to self-determination!
4) Chaim Weizman declared Palestine “a country without a people for a people with out a country!” the first part clearly a lie.
5) In 1938, Ben Gurion told the Jewish leaders “……in our political argument abroad, we minimize Arab opposition to us, but let us not forget among ourselves that we are the aggressors and they defend themselves….”
6) After the coming of Hitler and his mistreatment of Jews in March 1938, The US invited 33 countries to a conference on helping Jewish refugees from Germany. Australia, News Zealand, Canada, Peru, Colombia, .. said No. France said it had 20