Dialogue
This campaign is about freedom of expression, not Islam. Nonetheless, there has been a lot of conversation in the comments section between Muslims and others. This is great, and it is a real achievement. Thank you, Ismaeel and thank you, anonymous, for continuing to engage in this conversation.
The following is taken from a recent comment:
I'm Muslim and I'm not scary, and we're talking, and we shouldn't let any one scare us or intimidate us from having a dialogue.
What is unacceptable to me, as I've said many times is to engage with an inhumane political party like the BNP or the one from Denmark that wants to deport all muslims from Europe. This is offensive not to mention impractical - where will anyone get a kebab?
What is unacceptable to you, which I think is also very reasonable - is to engage with inhumane Islamist groups like Al-Qaida, that seek to agressively impose their brand of Islamism on the world.
I agree with you about that. So these two groups have to be off the table because they make for too intimidating an environment for the others unless they are prepared to modify their tactics and change their policies so as not to be a direct threat on others, in which case they can come back to the table. In other words there needs to be a ceasefire from both these camps to bring them back to the table.
Until then we should all agree that this is an uncivilised approach.
posted by Voltaire @ 8:57 AM
195 Comments:
"What is unacceptable to you, which I think is also very reasonable - is to engage with inhumane Islamist groups like Al-Qaida, that seek to agressively impose their brand of Islamism on the world.
I agree with you about that. "
The Muslim Brothers will fully agree with you. Or Tariq Ramadan. Or Abu Laban.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
The comment voltaire quoted in that post was written at the bottom of the comments to this post;
http://marchforfreeexpression.blogspot.com/2006/03/blaxploitation.html
Now, i quote below the last comment i wrote to "annonymous" before he made the comment voltaire re-posted. Annonymous had just suggested to me that the BNP was trying to kill him....
********************************************************************
BNP member wrote;
"Ive just finished my post to come up and write this at the top; I started of writing acrimoniously, but by the end i realised that its not you personally who is choosing to be bad, but i think you are very mistaken, so i changed my post acordingly.
You may notice that im not trying to kill you :)
I am trying to get you to see that your prophet was a violent phsycopath, and the more people that folow him the more physcopath wannabe's there will be. (allah akbar and all that)
Jesus said thou shalt not kill, while Mohammeds message was thou shall not kill a muslim. When the PM read out that "he who kills a single soul, it is as if he has killed the whole of mankind" quote from the koran on BBC primetime over and over was lying to us.
The quote is "He who kills a single soul that has not caused corruption in the land , it is as if he has killed the whole of mankind"
Remember, the PM had every PR guru to help him, and the best thing he could read out from the koran to convince us its non-violent to us? a lie. Because the koran IS violent as was mohammed.
About the English soldiers, if they did something wrong, our laws should have changed to stop them. Should the koran change? take out all the "apes and pigs" and beheading the infidel bits, the having the woman your right arm posseses bits, or is it just the English that should change to accomodate you and the millions like you coming here.
If something, anything, is wrong, it should change for the good of humanity. English, islam, christianity, French, whatever.
Here is what our greatest modern leader Churchill wrote about islam, and about what kept our Christian civilisation safe;
"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities...but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled,the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."
Sir Winston Churchill, our great wartime Prime Minister, On islam ("from The River War", first edition, Vol. II, pages 248,50 London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899)
As a last note. If you wernt muslim i wouldnt be arguing with you like this. I disagree with you because of what you choose to believe and who you choose to follow, just as i would with a nazi. As Churchill wrote, individual muslims can display many fine qualities, and you have displayed a few yourself. You are brave to come here and say your piece, and thats what free speech is all about. I dont believe your a bad person, but that your unintentionally backing the wrong team when it comes to good and evil.
Im proud of this post, and hope you dont take it as an attack on you personally, as some of my others probably were. Im sorry about that.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/index.htm
"Faith Freedom International is a grassroots worldwide movement of ex-Muslims and all those who are concerned about the rise of the Islamic threat."
*******************************************************************
So thats the last post i wrote to him. Now these are a few of the simply insulting and lying posts "annonymous", who now says that I am threatening and stopping constructive dialogue, wrote after that post. Also please note that i didnt take the bait and respond to any of them, as he was getting far to acrimonious and aggressive;
**********************************************
Anonymous wrote;
"Polish Solidarity with Denmark.
You say you're scared of Islam - fine. There is no political party in the UK that seeks to deport those with Polish blood.
Are you not scared of the BNP?
Have you seen what a bunch of sickos they are? "
****************************************************
Anonymous wrote;
"And how many times do I have to repeat - I'm not for BANNING the cartoons or changing the law, neither is Ismaeel.
My concern and Ismaeel's is about the sick F***s that are members of the BRITISH NATIONAL PARTY! "
**************************************
annonymous wrote;
"Hey BNP - gone all quiet?"
******************************************
"THE BNP ARE NOT RESPECTABLE. You can't even compare them with MAC. They seek to MURDER people. MAC don't. And just because you don't see the word Murder on their Manifesto doesn't mean that's not what it is. When they send back women and men to dies in their "countries of ethnic origin" and deport people who have lived in the country as bona fide citizens for generations because of their religion or skin colour.
The BNP are not respectable at all. You are very sick if you think that and you need help if you think that."
**********************************************************************************************************************************************
Hmmm! Never mind that that doesnt even resemble our policy!!
But whats the big difference between me and "annonymous" here? The muslim seeks to silence those who oppose him and his religion, something i have never done.
This is a link to a relevant post i made on my own "BNPandme" blog some time back;
http://bnpandme.blogspot.com/2006/03/new-top-link.html
An extract;
"But Hizb-but-tahrir (I cant spell it i admit) wants sharia law in the uk, and should in no way be banned from college campuses for that. Because where do you draw the line? an opinion is an opinion, and should be shared."
Sincerely,
Gareth.
BNP dude, great post, nicely assembled.
"But Hizb-but-tahrir (I cant spell it i admit) wants sharia law in the uk, and should in no way be banned from college campuses for that. Because where do you draw the line? an opinion is an opinion, and should be shared."
Here is a question for Ismaeel: if you believe that a Shiri'a court can only provide justice in an context that embraces all of Islam, that means you must feel that to install a Shiri'a court in the UK will not be just, therefore you are one of the "6 in 10 Muslims" that flatly oppose its introduction?
Cheers,
TFI
The whole disturbing aspect of this freedom of expression movement is that it tried to stop cartoons being shown thus taking self censorship as the order of the day, then asked for the bnp to stay away thus deciding who and who not was going to be allowed freedom of expression. Doing all this just so you could align with the muslims, whome the majority of finished up protesting against you in anycase, because they think they should be telling us what to do and not standing with us. The total bias of those decisions where the final deciding factor in making me become a bnp supporter.
Gareth - BNP Twat (sorry I meant British Nazi Party Member)
I've been to the BNP website and seen what it represents, and downloaded your so-called policies.
Mine, and the only intelligent conclusion to draw from all this is that the BNP organisation plays on people's fear, tars immigrants and particularly muslims with the "bogy man" brush, and advocates deporting ALL non whites to their countries of ethnic origin. And since we ALL originally came from Africa that ought to be Africa for British Whites? - Anyway it seems you're OK with "European kindred" descent, good job, if you weren't, you would have to deport the entire Royal Family to Germany!
There's very little to distinguish your so-called policies and indeed propoganda strategies with those employed by Nazi's before they got into power in Germany.
I didn't think for a second you'd come back to the table pretending to be reasonable because anyone with a brain cell can look at your site and see the insidiousness of what it represents for themselves.
If you think you can protect this country from barbaric punishments by re-introducing the death penalty you are more stupid than I thought. If you think my words are strong, they are not strong enough.
I have enough patriotism to realise that what the BNP represents is travesty of the word British. I am ashamed of your very existance as an active (albeit minority) political group in our cultural system.
Go take refuge with your pals and when you have acquired a brain cell between yourselves and finally realise that no constructive debate can exist while you threaten to aggressively eliminate any fellow Brits, whatever their skin colour, come back.
Until then I have every right to look upon you with the disdain you truly deserve.
Oh great - now we have two BNP supporters here - great job! What part of "you're not welcome" don't you understand?
Voltaire, did you know that Tariq Ramadan protested against the performance of a Voltaire play on Mohammed in 1993 in Geneva? T.R argued it was insulting the prophet Mohammed, and claimed that staging the play would ''be another brick in an edifice of hatred and rejection in which Muslims feel they are being enclosed.''
Sounds familiar to me.
They had another go recently, and you will find the reference to the 1993 attack on Freedom of Speech in the middle of this article (search it for "Ramadan" to locate that reference quickly)
http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/001756.html
This blog has become the debate of Muslim beliefs and the ideology of the BNP party. I fear that the element of “freedom of expression/of speech” is getting lost somewhat. I also fear that the message this blog (and subsequent rallies/marches) is giving out is solely that of Islam and the ramifications those beliefs have on our way of life.
Can we not focus and communicate a more far reaching proposition if we are to “..formulate a firm strategy for advancing our agenda.”?
I would like to attend on 22nd but some of the blogs have made be feel unwanted, un-educated and un-welcome. I can envisage a mass brawl, will you be asking the met to attend Voltaire??
Anonymous,
I have just realised that "Dialogue" is a fragment of your reply to my concerns.
http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=22297247&postID=114382986089834631
You say "Of course it's rational that you should be scared, especially reading all of that stuff and failing to realise that you are being played like a monkey in the propoganda of fear politics."
What "propaganda" do you mean? Are you insinuating that what I see with my own eyes is a secret plot of Islamophobes trying to discredit your own creed? That The Holy Qur'aan, Hadith and Sira are sabotage materials produced by The Very Far Right to deceive me about the Religion of Peace? You cannot build any dialogue on the premise that your opponent is a half-wit instead of providing a hard core evidence to refute my arguments.
"What is unacceptable to you, which I think is also very reasonable - is to engage with inhumane Islamist groups like Al-Qaida, that seek to agressively impose their brand of Islamism on the world."
No, this is not enough to me. I do not wish any, even the most moderate of moderate brands of Islam imposed on me or the rest of the world, be it in the most peaceful way.
Anonymous, a round table sounds like a great idea, but what are we to negotiate? Terms of free speech? Smooth talk does not cost anything. Muslims call it takiyya, infidels call it diplomacy.
Why after 7/7 did I not see MAC marching in the streets with banners saying "Not in my name"?
Why don't your imams preach in the mosques "Love thy infidel as thyself"? Why isn't there a similar distrust or fear towards Hindus, Jews, Sikhs in this country as towards Muslims? No smoke without fire, Mate.
Please answer my questions before we sit together by a cup of tea and a biscuit.
I hope you'll attend, feste clown. Please email, in confidence, with your real name so we can add you to the list.
feste clown,
I agree with you.
This will lead to the March chatting with MAC on panels and thus ennobling MAC, and giving MAC the opportunity to show that all March wants is to vilify and oppress the poor, poor Muslims.
Sad.
feste clown,
I will turn up in a bullet-proof jacket and a helmet just in case (only joking). Still think that passion might bring more progress than the apathy and lethargy we have witnessed for so long here.
Having said that I absolutely agree with you. It is time to act. Let's do something constructive. Words are cheap and ....wearing.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
@babyboots & polish solidarity
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0520246217/
or
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0520246209/
Just in case you don't know it
Good god guys! Chill out.
BTW Gay Muslims was a good show if you want to get worked up about ethnic injustice. “Don’t Panic I’m Islamic” is a good show to remind you how people are people and that we have more in common than not.
Anonymous, you treat BNP members or sympathizes as if they were subhuman. If only they were to drop their ideology, they would be just fine. Sounds very familiar to another argument I’ve heard.
I think that the BNP and political Islam have more in common than not.
Could you take your bun fight to the MAC board and stop polluting this one?
Cheers,
TFI
Thanks Luke, very imformative!
I think its about time I let the 'cat out of the bag' to Anonymous!
There isn't just two BNP people on this forum!
There's three!
I'm a BNP supporter as well!
:/
I am not a supporter of the BNP, But I find it interesting that the so called 'racist' stuff is so one-sided with them because they defend white,christian, british values.
It's perfectly ok for 'Black' groups to have solidarity with their culture and history.(operation black vote, black history month etc.) It's pefectly ok for jewish groups as well.. But anytime 'whitey' seeks to defend his interests he is a bigot, racist scumbag!??
Who said that all whites have to be guilty and self loathing or otherwise they are all racist?
Just who is being racist here?
"Guilty of being white"?
Not me.. Why should I? Why should something that happened hundreds of years ago make me be ashamed of my culture..
I am White and proud and am not a racist about it. I embrace other cultures.. I wish to learn about them.. But I won't be guilty of mine.. If that makes me a racist than shame on you for thinking that.. I believe that view to be incredibly 'racist'..
TheFriendlyInfidel said...
BNP dude, great post, nicely assembled.
"But Hizb-but-tahrir (I cant spell it i admit) wants sharia law in the uk, and should in no way be banned from college campuses for that. Because where do you draw the line? an opinion is an opinion, and should be shared."
Here is a question for Ismaeel: if you believe that a Shiri'a court can only provide justice in an context that embraces all of Islam, that means you must feel that to install a Shiri'a court in the UK will not be just, therefore you are one of the "6 in 10 Muslims" that flatly oppose its introduction?
Cheers,
TFI
12:05 PM
Leading question...my answer however has to be more nuanced. Shariah law in various elements already exists in various ways in a voluntary self-regulating way- shariah courts for divorce cases, custody rights, inheritance etc. All issues relating to family law. Also many banks now offer shariah compliant loans and mortgages (though to be honest i don't really think they are anything of the sort)and Muslims daily pray, annually fast and pay zakat and try and perform the pilgrimage once a lifetime all according to the shariah. Certain aspects of english law mirror shairah law quite closely like for instance laws on contracts. Also we have tolerance from most employers and schools for women's dress code and men's beards. To be honest with you i don't know what is meant by implementing the shairah in muslim majority areas as i have never met an Imam who espouses such a view. As i've said before i believe this is scare-mongering by vested interests.
Also for the record, although not a member of HT, from my understanding they have never campaigned for the introduction of shariah law in the UK and are quite expicit about restoring the Caliphate in Muslim majority countries not here.
I was not actually in the country in the wake of 7/7 (i hear the rumble of conspiracy theories being woven) I was visiting family in SL. MAC didn't exist at that time and i don't know what the thought processes were that determined the Muslim response in this country. I imagine people felt very worried about a backlash and at the same time very shocked and outraged. I doubt they felt very comfortable coming out in the streets to say not in my name. What you have to understand Polish Solidarity is it is very different for a minority group to come out and say "not in my name" then it is for the majority. I don't remember Dr MLK organising protests about the racist tactics of the Black Power Movement, or being criticised for not having done so. However he did speak against them, which is what the vast majority of Imams did when this event happened from my understanding.
"it is very different for a minority group to come out and say "not in my name" "
That's right Ismaeel. Naser Khader has a lot to say about this. (That is, if he is not killed before you can talk to him)
Luke said...
"it is very different for a minority group to come out and say "not in my name" "
That's right Ismaeel. Naser Khader has a lot to say about this. (That is, if he is not killed before you can talk to him)
5:17 PM
Oh is that the chap from Free Muslims Coalition?
Yeah i don't listen to puppets, except Sweep, i always enjoyed his role in the Sooty show
I agree with this. All you have to do in Islam is believe. The Quran repeats this over and over ad nauseam.
Believing is doing what the Quran tells you.
Thinking is not believing, it's a sin.
Listening to your conscience is thinking, thus wrong.
LOL, this makes me laugh because if you ask 95% of converts to Islam (of which i am one) is that Islam is the absolute opposite of this. The Qur'aan puts it to you to think, reflect, challenge, research and question all of it's claims. It is Christianity i think u will find that teaches you to ignore reason and science and just believe, as so many Christians have said to me.
Polish soldiarity i have to research into this as it is not something i have ever looked into in depth before. At this stage though i'd just like to point out that in Orthodoz Judaism which bases it's laws on the Torah which of course forms part of the Old Testement (i.e. part of the tradition of your Judeo-Christian values-although that notion is somewhat daft as Christians spent most of history persecuting Jews for allegedly killing Prophet Jesus (PBUH) despite their belief this was divinely ordained so he ould be resurrected) and was brought by Prophet Moses (PBUH) the punishment for adultery is also stoning to death, murder is also punishable by death and apostacy is also punishable by death.
Ismaeel said:
"Oh is that the chap from Free Muslims Coalition?
Yeah i don't listen to puppets, except Sweep, i always enjoyed his role in the Sooty show"
This is about Freedom of Speech.
Naser Khader is this person giving an interview here.
http://agora.blogsome.com/2006/04/03/demos-interview-with-naser-khader/
"Prophet Jesus"
I take offence !!!! He is the Son of God, and God.
Who are you to insult 2 Billion people !!!!!!!!
Nay, this was a joke. The God of the Christians is too strong to need humans to defend him and the Truth about him.
Luke said...
Ismaeel said:
"Oh is that the chap from Free Muslims Coalition?
Yeah i don't listen to puppets, except Sweep, i always enjoyed his role in the Sooty show"
This is about Freedom of Speech.
Naser Khader is this person giving an interview here.
http://agora.blogsome.com/2006/04/03/demos-interview-with-naser-khader/
Oh he's that chap from the multicultural thingy in Denmark, my apologies
Oh and Prophet Jesus (PBUH) refers to himself at least once as a Prophet (PBUH) in the Bible as well as the "Son of Man" but i don't think there is a single reference where he claims to be the son of God
Ok read that article. He's supported by 16% of the Muslims in Denmark... interesting. I don't agree with all this nonsense about 10 commandments of democracy and all this modernist Islam buisness.
I don't agree with what he says about the Muslim brotherhood movements, i think they are quite open in propagating their ideology, you can buy their stuff anywhere and everywhere.
I do agree that al-Qaeeda are Salafy-Wahabbis.
I think it is important that people especially in Britain research into the roots of the Wahabbi movement and find the hand of the British in instigating their ugly perversion of theology in what is now KSA to destabilise the Ottomon Caliphate.
> Leading question...my answer
> however has to be more nuanced.
Your answer was not nuanced, it was obfuscating.
For someone that is so determined in their beliefs and claims to be sincere, you spend a lot of time sitting on a fence.
A yes / no answer would be more appropriate than "I know of no person that is asking for this".
You have stated that you do not feel that a Shiri'a court can be just outside of a true Islamic state.
Therefore by your own argument there can be no Shiri'a court in existence today that is "fair".
Cheers,
TFI
I think it is important that people especially in Britain research into the roots of the Wahabbi movement and find the hand of the British in instigating their ugly perversion of theology in what is now KSA to destabilise the Ottomon Caliphate.
Yes Ismaeel, Democracy is hypocrisy and we all have blood on our hands. Whereas the Caliphate was nothing but sweetness and love, it was a near utopia and in far supremacy to anything Christian borne descents could have never imagined or dreamed (despite the occasional stoning loving applied to those that wanted their sins atoned etc)
Cheers,
TFI
(PS. Could all you BNP people please find somewhere else to troll? The Jihad watch board will welcome you with open arms)
See you on the 22nd....
...for my personal safety I shall be the one at the back wearing a fake moustache and a dolly parton wig, please address me as Shirley!
I hope to meet some of you there.
Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
>> I do agree that al-Qaeeda are Salafy-Wahabbis.
I think it is important that people especially in Britain research into the roots of the Wahabbi movement and find the hand of the British in instigating their ugly perversion of theology in what is now KSA to destabilise the Ottomon Caliphate.
Coming from someone whose views are not visibly different from the Salafists :), this comment is priceless.
Ismaeel... I'm putting our conversation back up in
http://what-global-civility.blogspot.com
(not completely up yet)
So we may carry on our Civil conversation.
Last we left off, you said it was quite OK to blow up the Bhuddhas because they de-humanized people, notably the West, which were more concerned to save a few pieces of stone than to save a starving population.
I asked you what your take on how whether Islam de-humanzied people by making them focus more on Hajj for a bunch of people to walk around a piece of stone, and Da'wa and building mosques than spending the money on feeding people- no strings attached.
You responded by deleting our very civil conversation. What happened?
TFI
Now that's not very nice of you to boot out any group from this message board on Free Expression.
Our friend Ismaeel here also doesn't believe in moral relativism and multiculturalism... much like the BNP.
And we should continue to make him feel very welcome here.
TFI friday wrote;
"(PS. Could all you BNP people please find somewhere else to troll? The Jihad watch board will welcome you with open arms)"
You said my last post was great!
Islam is not a monolith. I have referred to the book by Irshad Manji in at least one other post and believe that the ideas that she brings to light offer a real chance of building a bridge between Islam and the Western world. I would seriously recommend Muslims and non-Muslims to visit her website:
http://www.muslim-refusenik.com
What do you think to her views Ismaeel, have you read her book? What do you think about the concept that she mentions – Ijtihad?
Peace and Compassion to those who insult Lord Buddha
aeneas - good link.
Feste
BNP dude, it was and is, a most excellent post. You summarized view points and span the table around beautifully: who is the irrational hater?
Its all this "I'm comming out of the closet stuff. I'm BNP too!!!" stuff that is a little too much. Its making the board feel like a support group! There is no shortage of nasty links and stories about Islam out there to swap them amoungst ourselves. This board is not about airing personal grevances, its about debate.
> Our friend Ismaeel here also
> doesn't believe in moral
> relativism and multiculturalism.
> .. much like the BNP.
Oh yes he does, if you check aback through the boards you will find how he feels that having sex with 9-15 old girls is OK in different cultures, but not here and that he can bear to practise his religion without this right. That's cultural relativism if I've ever seen it.
I'm a cultural relativist too, but I am also a firm believer in "Best Practices" which I firmly believe are mostly found in the Western world.
Absolutely Ismaeel is very welcome here, I'm very interested in what he has to say, he does not say ...
> You responded by deleting our
> very civil conversation. What
> happened?
... and what he slips up about and then deletes.
It is funny that exact same thing happened to me in while having a civil dialogue about the pro's and con's of women getting stoned.
Fortunately I was able to retrieve it from the Google cache, this annoyed me so much I've now a script that collects posts from the MAC site to ensure that things don't go missing anymore.
Here is a top tip, to find your posts on the MAC site Google the following string, it’s a site search:
site:http://muslim-action-committee.blogspot.com Common Sense
I apologize if this is teaching you how to suck eggs. If the pages has "vanished", you need only click the "cached" link to get it back.
I’ll be back in a week, keep the candle burning for me.
Cheers,
TFI
I'm ignoring you Common Sense, because i see absolutely no point to conversation with you. You ignore my points or say stupid things like my ideas are like Salafys and SWT means blessings upon the Prophet (PBUH) and then attempt to give credence to all this by saying you're an arab-american.
TFI:
I saved all the posts as I wrote them :).
>> I'm ignoring you Common Sense, because i see absolutely no point to conversation with you.
Fine. But why delete what was written?
>> You ignore my points
I didn't ignore your points. I listened to your points. You said it was OK for Muhammad to expel the Pagans from Mecca, and for him to take control of the Kaaba.
Then you condemned the Conquistadors for kicking out the Muslims from Andalucia- for their intolerance.
I asked you to reconcile those two points.
>> or say stupid things like my ideas are like Salafys
Well you said it was OK to blow up the Bhuddhas because they de-humanized people. That's what the Salafis believe.
Why don't you list the ways in which you and the Salafis differ. That way, you can shut me up.
>> and SWT means blessings upon the Prophet (PBUH)
That was a slip-up. I thanked you for the correction.
>> and then attempt to give credence to all this by saying you're an arab-american.
I am not an Arab-American. I am an Arab-Canadian.
Want to put me through the test? Want me to give you a call and speak to you in Arabic?
Ismaeel, you said "I imagine people felt very worried about a backlash and at the same time very shocked and outraged. I doubt they felt very comfortable coming out in the streets to say not in my name. What you have to understand Polish Solidarity is it is very different for a minority group to come out and say "not in my name" then it is for the majority."
And did British Muslims feel worried and uncomfortable when they went out 3 times in the streets to protest against the cartoons?
aeneas said...
Islam is not a monolith. I have referred to the book by Irshad Manji in at least one other post and believe that the ideas that she brings to light offer a real chance of building a bridge between Islam and the Western world. I would seriously recommend Muslims and non-Muslims to visit her website:
http://www.muslim-refusenik.com
What do you think to her views Ismaeel, have you read her book? What do you think about the concept that she mentions – Ijtihad?
I've heard alot about this woman from Canadians i know, just looked over her website now. What was most interesting was her discussion about her madrassa education. It sounds like she didn't have a teacher who could explain Islam to her properly and then she's drifted without proper guidance since, it happens to many and i feel sorry for her.
As for her view about ijtihad. Ijtihad has the same linguistic root as the word jihad- both mean to struggle. However the form means to struggle with the texts of the Qur'aan and the Sunnah and to derive rulings from them. It does not mean free thinking. If we look at Islamic history only the highest calibre scholars such as Imam Abu Hanifah (RA), Imam Jafar as-Sadiq (RA) etc who were masters of all the Islamic religious sciences were able to derive principles of jurisprudence from the sources and then apply them to derive rulings. The students of these scholars arranged themselves into schools to apply these principles. When new circumstances arise those principles can still be applied. In this way existing Islamic law is flexible in accomadating new situations and events. I don't believe Ms Manji knows enough about what she is talking about. She is completley ostracised in the Muslim world as far as i am aware especially in Canada.
Ismaeel
As a Muslim will you be signing the Manifesto of 12: Together Facing a New Totalitarianism as mentioned on the site of the link I previously provided?
P.S. Ismaeel. I lived in the Gulf countries- home to the "Salafis". And you sound like one to me based on the cross-section of discussion we've had thusfar.
Do correct the misconception by laying out some examples of what you think they do that is unacceptable, and how you differ from them on that.
(or you can just ignore me :) )
Fine
Salafys don't believe in Madhabbs
I do
Salafys don't believe in the Light of the Prophet (SAWS)
I do
Salafys believe Allah (SWT) has a direction and a location
I don't
Salafys believe the Prophet (PBUH) didn't have knowledge of the unseen
I do
Salafys believe anything which isn't word for word specified in a hadith is a bidah (illegal religious innovation)
I don't
Salafys believe Sufism is a non-Islamic cult
Whereas they are the cult.
Salafys don't believe in Awliya (Saints) their tombs, their intercession etc
I do
It really doesn't matter what ethnicity you are, all you are about is trying to prove how clever you are, when in fact you are not. I can't be bothered to entertain your ego any further.
aeneas said...
Ismaeel
As a Muslim will you be signing the Manifesto of 12: Together Facing a New Totalitarianism as mentioned on the site of the link I previously provided?
No, because it's arrant nonsense.
TheFriendlyInfidel said...
> Leading question...my answer
> however has to be more nuanced.
Your answer was not nuanced, it was obfuscating.
For someone that is so determined in their beliefs and claims to be sincere, you spend a lot of time sitting on a fence.
A yes / no answer would be more appropriate than "I know of no person that is asking for this".
You have stated that you do not feel that a Shiri'a court can be just outside of a true Islamic state.
Therefore by your own argument there can be no Shiri'a court in existence today that is "fair".
Cheers,
TFI
*I was referring to Islam as a governing system which deals with international affairs, criminal law etc when i said Shariah courts could not be fair.
As far as family law is concerned it is quite possible to have fair shariah courts in this country or anywhere else and they already exist on a voluntary, self-regulating basis.
Ok let me make myself clear about this, as long as we can eat halal, not be discriminated in our schools and workplaces for our dress and beards, as long as we can build mosques and pray in them, as long as we can go for hajj, as long as we can fast in Ramadhan, as long as we can worship Allah (SWT) freely and without persecution and manage our family issues such as marriage, divorce, burials etc according to our religious laws, i think we've got the amount of shariah we need to get by in this society.
Like i said before i don't know to what extent of shariah law people want to impose of Muslim-majority communities, because i don't know who they are to read their proposals or ask them. As Professor Sokheedo has helpfully not given any names, they are a little difficult to find. I'll say it again he is a troublemaker and a liar. If you can prove me wrong, go ahead and i'll retract it.
Ismaeel said...
It sounds like she didn't have a teacher who could explain Islam to her properly and then she's drifted without proper guidance since, it happens to many and i feel sorry for her.
Ismaeel - Does this happen a lot in madrassas?
> But whats the big difference
> between me and "annonymous" here?
> The muslim seeks to silence those
> who oppose him and his religion,
> something i have never done.
That’s very interesting actually because while quizzing Ismaeel on his opinon on the hate spewing Islam ruining "Abu where-your-Hanza" he told me:
I don't think Abu Hamza was evil, i don't think anyone is evil. There isn't really a concept of evil in Islam. One of the first things i was taught as a Muslim was that "Don't hate people, hate their wrong actions". This is because Islam sees people as inherently good and with the opportunity to attain salvation until the last minute.
Seems to me like our friend Anonymous ought take a leaf from Ismaeel’s book and not see all BNP members as evil, just misguided.
Although I won't even start to go through the leafs that Ismaeel should take from anonymous, I've plane to catch and I'm sure that there is enough space.
Cheers,
TFI
Polish Solidarity with Denmark said...
Ismaeel, you said "I imagine people felt very worried about a backlash and at the same time very shocked and outraged. I doubt they felt very comfortable coming out in the streets to say not in my name. What you have to understand Polish Solidarity is it is very different for a minority group to come out and say "not in my name" then it is for the majority."
And did British Muslims feel worried and uncomfortable when they went out 3 times in the streets to protest against the cartoons?
8:41 PM
Well it's a different context. Using the analogy i used last time, MLK came out and protested against white supremacy in birmingham alabama and elsewhere, he didn't however protest against the black power movement, despite radically disagreeing with them.
After 7/7 i think alot of Muslims were quite shocked and horrified and were more interested in going and finding out how this happened and trying to sort it out.
With the cartoons the community felt angry at the attack on their Prophet (PBUH) and peaceful protests were a good way of channeling that anger in a positive way.
Ismaeel said...
However the form means to struggle with the texts of the Qur'aan and the Sunnah and to derive rulings from them. It does not mean free thinking.
Ismaeel – do you think free thinking is a bad thing?
Ismaeel said...
If we look at Islamic history only the highest calibre scholars such as Imam Abu Hanifah (RA), Imam Jafar as-Sadiq (RA) etc who were masters of all the Islamic religious sciences were able to derive principles of jurisprudence from the sources and then apply them to derive rulings.
Ismaeel – How does one become a “highest calibre scholar”? How is the opinion of such a person more valid than that of anyone else, surely their interpretations are just opinion?
Ismaeel said...
However the form means to struggle with the texts of the Qur'aan and the Sunnah and to derive rulings from them. It does not mean free thinking.
Ismaeel – do you think free thinking is a bad thing?
I don't think free thinking is a bad thing, i think it's a good thing. However when it comes to understanding religious texts which were very carefully preserved along with the science of how to interpret them from the founder of the religion (PBUH)himself then if you are a believer you have to go with that.
aeneas said:
Ismaeel – How does one become a “highest calibre scholar”? How is the opinion of such a person more valid than that of anyone else, surely their interpretations are just opinion?
The scholar who is able to perform ijtihad is called a Mujtahid. This scholar has firstly to be a master of classical arabic (no mean feat, try learning classical arabic grammer), to have memorised the Qur'aan, memorised 10,000 hadith, to know the rulings given by the Prophet (PBUH) and those of his family and companions eligable to give rulings, to be an extremley devout and pious Muslim in one's own conduct and many many other qualifications. Having reached this level they are thorough experts on the subject and are capable of exerting their own faculties to the weighty task of essentially interpreting Allah (SWT)'s words and those of his Messenger (SAWS). This is why their understanding has much more authority than mine or any other lesser scholarly person.
Ismaeel.
Thanks for the list.
>> It really doesn't matter what ethnicity you are,
Then you shouldn't have assumed that I tried to gain credibility by "pretending" to be Arab.
>> all you are about is trying to prove how clever you are,
Why be mean? I was asking sincere questions. I wasn't trying to be "clever". Were my posts "Clever" in your opinion?
You were not giving me straight answers.
I was trying to understand what you meant by your drive for "Global Civility". Trying to distinguish when something that is said should be considered "Valid Criticism", and when it should be considered "Gratuitous Insult".
You spent days beating around the bush, finally saying that you see nothing wrong in the actions of Muhammad destroying the Idols of the Kaaba, and his expulsion of Pagans from Mecca. You said you saw nothing wrong with the Taliban blowing up the Bhuddhas because they had come to symbolise the de-humanization of the West.
You described the Trinity as strange, and referred to the Statues as "pieces of stone".
I asked you to tell me if you felt it acceptable "criticism" to call Muhammad an intolerant bigot, in much the same way that you describe the Conquistadors or "traditional Christians".
I was wondering if that was part of the pact of Global Civility.
And now you say I am trying to be smart?
>> when in fact you are not. I can't be bothered to entertain your ego any further.
Fine: Why did you delete the posts?
Don't answer anything else. Just explain: Why did you delete the Posts?
I explained very clearly to you several times what global civility meant and what it's narrow remit was in terms of how we discuss and dialogue. You chose to ignore that and instead waffle on about issues of politics, history, religion etc.
I realised you were trying to alter the image of our campaign by widening out the discussion and trying to link it back to the campaign about issues which have nothing to do with it. I made that clear several times.
I deleted the posts because i didn't want peope reading the posts on the MAC blog and associating my religious views and views on history and politics with the Campaign which is something completly different. So you can post it up wherever it is your hearts content to do so, but not on the MAC blog. Thanks
Oh and i said you were attempting to give yourself credence by describing yourself as an Arab-American (which is how you described yourself) whether it is true or not it doesn't cut any ice with me and that was my point.
TFI I agree they are both frigging mad - but I hope you can see that just as being British doesn't make you BNP being Islamic doesn't make you Al-Qaida!
I said I was an Arab living in North America.
>> I explained very clearly to you several times what global civility meant and what it's narrow remit was in terms of how we discuss and dialogue.
Yes. And I asked you if you thought that calling Muhammad an intolerant bigot for his actions was OK with you in terms of how we discuss and dialogue.
I mean you're OK with saying that the "pieces of stone" that are the Bamiyam Bhuddha dehumanize people, and hence ought to have been destroyed.
So I ask you- and I ask you sincerely- is it OK to say that that collection of papers that is the Koran has de-humanized people and made them think its OK to flog adulterers, and stone homosexuals, be destroyed.
What is your Global vision for Global Civility: Is it your ability to go around and say, "I don't believe in Multi-culturalism", and "Your ideas are Strange and de-humanizing", while getting assurances that no-body will say the same to you? That no-body will call Muhammad a terrorist?
I never said I hated BNP people I said they are sick and make me ashamed to be British and that's a fair point given (and this is a long story which I( won't go into) that if they had had their way I would be dead now - so don't blame me for getting upset.
Ismaeel said...
Ok let me make myself clear about this, as long as we can eat halal, not be discriminated in our schools and workplaces for our dress and beards, as long as we can build mosques and pray in them, as long as we can go for hajj, as long as we can fast in Ramadhan, as long as we can worship Allah (SWT) freely and without persecution and manage our family issues such as marriage, divorce, burials etc according to our religious laws, i think we've got the amount of shariah we need to get by in this society.
Regarding marriage, does this include polygamy and mut'a?
What is more offensive blowing up statues of Buddha (a destructive act) or drawing a cartoon (a creative act)?
Also what caused the poverty in Afghanistan when the Buddha statues were destroyed?
aenas said:
Regarding marriage, does this include polygamy and mut'a?
well as a sunni muslim i don't believe in mut'a. However i believe both are possible under english law.
Ismaeel
Thanks for answering my questions.
Ismaeel: Final post to you.
>> I realised you were trying to alter the image of our campaign by widening out the discussion and trying to link it back to the campaign about issues which have nothing to do with it. I made that clear several times.
No- I was not trying to alter the image of your campaign. Your campaign itself slowly changed (Note: it started off requesting a "minimum" standard of civility be met).
I found it peculiar though, the list of supporters.
The list of Muslims groups and Mosques (that included HT).
Why this sudden drive for "Global Civility" because a newspaper in Denmark published some cartoons, and non-British European papers followed suit.
Every day in the Middle East media- be it Salafi controlled, or Shia, (or from any other Sunni madhab for that matter), you have the most terrible things being said: about Hindus (learn Arabic, and flip on Al-Jazeera). Read the newspapers. Log into MEMRI, and watch a clip from Al-Shatat, produced by Syrian TV and aired by Al-Manar, a channel that when it was being banned in France, Muslims went gung-ho over teh potential ban asking where "Freedom of Speech" was.
Where were all those Muslim groups then? The ones that reared their heads now and created a movement called Global Civility?
Sure, there are Muslims who spoke up before. There's plenty of them. But they are the Nasser Khaders (a puppet), Irshad Manji (misguided), and whole slew of others...
But Hizb-u-Tahrir? My oh my, where did it get all this strength from.
To set up a web-site, try to hook up a debate in Oxford Secular Society on Civility. All this energy. All this strength. Masha'Allah!
Anyways. I wish you all the best. But as a I told you before, you'll gain more credibility if your battle for Civility didn't focus on "how people talked to each other". Clearly, you're not polished in that regard either. But focus on more important things: focus on fighting for the dignity and life of those Yemeni and Jordanian journalists. At least feign the attempt. People will look at you with a little more respect. Fight also for improvements of the Human Rights situations in Muslim countries. People will look more respectfully at you and your groups.
Best of Luck.
Common Sense.
No- I was not trying to alter the image of your campaign. Your campaign itself slowly changed (Note: it started off requesting a "minimum" standard of civility be met).
And it still does, it hasn't changed from that. End of story.
aeneas said...
What is more offensive blowing up statues of Buddha (a destructive act) or drawing a cartoon (a creative act)?
Also what caused the poverty in Afghanistan when the Buddha statues were destroyed?
Ok let me clarify my position, i don't believe in going around destroying buddha statues willy nilly. In Afghanistan poverty had been caused by the US abandoning it to inter-factional fighting between the Mujahideen who had helped them give the USSR a good kicking. The country then suffered further because of the "moral high ground" the west took with the Taliban who has actually improved the situation by stabilising the country and ending the factional fighting that was destroying most of the country. Yes there was still a civil war but at least some law and order could occur. Now i am not apologising for the Taliban, they had alot of faults as well. But what they saw as hypocricy and frankly i agree is that western companies were coming in to restore two statues which had not been visited by Buddhists for centuries, but refused to give money to help feed the hungry people of Afghanistan. In the shariah preservation of one's life comes even before one's religious obligations, thus it is permissable to eat pork and drink wine if starving and having no alternative. The Western companies involved were clearly acting in an inhumane way. The destruction of the statues was to demonstrate the insignificance of their importance in relation to human life, which i hope you would agree with.
Now before anyone starts, i've already anticipated all the posts about well satirising the Prophet (PBUH) is less of a crime than the terrorism committed in his name. Arguably so, however does that justify satirising him (PBUH), he didn't approve of their actions or give legal sanction for them. In fact if you read many of their statements and "fatwas" they usually embroil themselves in countless excuses and legal chinangry in trying to justify not following Islamic law, by emphasising the importance of achieving their aim. However the end seperated from the means is not an Islamic concept but a thoroughly materialistic one and more akin to ideologies like Stalinism than to traditional understandings of Islam.
"I think it is important that people especially in Britain research into the roots of the Wahabbi movement and find the hand of the British in instigating their ugly perversion of theology in what is now KSA to destabilise the Ottomon Caliphate."
Clearly Ismaeel assumes, quite incorrectly, that no British person would possibly have any knowledge on this subject, and thus makes this completely ridiculous statement, thinking that nobody will notice the absurdity of it all.
Wahhabism was created around 1740 by Muhammad ibn Abdul al-Wahhab, who funnily enough, was not a British Colonialist, but instead a devout Arab Sunni Muslim. Wahhabism gained steadily more influence until various wars were fought between the Wahhabis and the Ottoman Empire from circa 1800 A.D. The British Empire only began to send aid the Wahhabis from 1850-1900, to help them against the Ottomans, who regularly attacked European ships on established trading routes. The idea that Western Colonialists could possibly have have had any influence on how Islam was practiced in Arabia in 1740 is absurd, not least because the Europeans were unable to reach that part of the world at that time, as the Ottoman Empire was too strong and attacked any European ships they saw in their territories. The Ottoman Empire had attacked Vienna only 60 years before this in 1683, and almost conquerd that city. This shows what a powerful force it was at that time.
Sorry Ismaeel, but British Colonialism was not responsible for Wahhabism. It is the Arabs in Arabia who adopted it at that time who were. Nice try though.
History Lesson over. Long live free speech.
aeneas...
The process of destroying the Bamiyan Buddhas long predates the arrival of the Taliban.
The statues were hacked away at for centuries by iconoclasts, with considerable damage done by the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb (this particular emperor is known for other atrocities). Those people were driven by austerity, not the lack of wealth. They were emperors. They took their direction from the example of Muhammad destroying Idols in the Ka'aba.
The first attempt at destroying the Bamiyan Buddhas came in 1998, when the Taliban first gained control of the area (Bamiyan). Mullah Omar then issued an edict saying that since the statues were not worshipped, per se, then they could remain untouched.
The West imposed sanctions on Afghanistan because it held a certain fellow by the name of OBL. Noteworthy is that this person is not really a Muslim, but belongs to a Non-Islamic cult called Wahabism/Salafism :).
Anyhow, the Taliban could have shown its (ahem) commitment to true Islamic principles by burning the Korans and mosques that the Saudis provided them with, and told them that more pressing humanitarian needs were in order (e.g. feeding the poor Afghanis). But instead of taking their wrath out on the Saudis , and their puritanical version of Islam, they lashed out on what's held dear by Buddhists. The same Buddhists whose organisations were slaving away in the refugee camps providing aid to the needy and hungry.
Of course, Mullah Omar could have revitalized Afghanistan instead of working to build the "perfect" Islamic emirate- a more dehumanizing endeavour, if ever there was one. Perhaps, the tourist dollars would have helped re-vitalize the country. But that was not to be.
Since the destruction, some Westerners have pointed to the irony of the fact that the materialist world has become obsessed with objects instead of caring for the poor and needy. A documentary was filmed by Swiss film-maker:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0478157/
Among numerous articles in archaelogical magazines. Many of the people who belittled the crime were Buddhists and Christians (yes, those de-humanized by kissing statues of the Virgin Mary or the feet of Baby Jesus). Even then, in the face of the most humane grouping of people ever to grace the face of this earth, those people showed enough hate to go back to Afghanistan, to help the needy, and to feed the poor.
And what's the Taliban (inspired by the Humanizing Qu'ran) doing?
Very nice! I found a place where you can
make some nice extra cash secret shopping. Just go to the site below
and put in your zip to see what's available in your area.
I made over $900 last month having fun!
make extra money
TFI (who hopefully has managed to catch his plane, as he kept telling us a thousand times) said
"I think that the BNP and political Islam have more in common than not."
"Could you take your bun fight to the MAC board and stop polluting this one?"
"(PS. Could all you BNP people please find somewhere else to troll? The Jihad watch board will welcome you with open arms)"
"Its all this "I'm comming out of the closet stuff. I'm BNP too!!!" stuff that is a little too much. Its making the board feel like a support group!"
Wow!
It's amazing isn't it! All because I observed a character that does 'run with the fox and hunt with the hound'
And he has tried unsuccessfully to hound me off the board!
Well I've got breakfast to catch so I'll give the keyboard over to the BNP man!!!
Peace and Love to all
xxx
Sorry Ismaeel, but British Colonialism was not responsible for Wahhabism. It is the Arabs in Arabia who adopted it at that time who were. Nice try though.
History Lesson over. Long live free speech.
*The documented of British spies in influencing Abdul Wahabb is well documented. You don't need ships to send spies.
Even then, in the face of the most humane grouping of people ever to grace the face of this earth, those people showed enough hate to go back to Afghanistan, to help the needy, and to feed the poor.
LOL Common Sense my foot. Afghanistan was abandoned by the west for years. It only became important for the west to help out there because they wanted to put an oil pipeline through it. The evidence for that is overwhelming.
I didn't see anybody going in and saving the